BUILDING COMMUNITY RESILIENCE TO NATURAL DISASTERS THROUGH PARTNERSHIP SHARING EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE IN THE REGION
Discussion Paper of the Project on Building Community Resilience to Natural Disasters through Partnership: Sharing Experience and Expertise in the Region
ESCAP is the regional development arm of the United Nations and serves as the main economic and social development centre for the United Nations in Asia and the Pacific. Its mandate is to foster cooperation between its 53 members and 9 associate members. ESCAP provides the strategic link between global and country-level programmes and issues. It supports Governments of the region in consolidating regional positions and advocates regional approaches to meeting the region’s unique socio-economic challenges in a globalizing world. The ESCAP office is located in Bangkok, Thailand. Please visit our website at www.unescap.org for further information.
The shaded areas of the map represent ESCAP members and associate members.
BUILDING COMMUNITY RESILIENCE TO NATURAL DISASTERS THROUGH PARTNERSHIP SHARING EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE IN THE REGION
Discussion Paper
New York, 2008
i
BUILDING COMMUNITY RESILIENCE TO NATURAL DISASTERS THROUGH PARTNERSHIP SHARING EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE IN THE REGION
United Nations publication Sales No. E.08.II.F.20 Copyright © United Nations 2008 All rights reserved Manufactured in Thailand ISBN: 978-92-1-120553-4 ST/ESCAP/2508
Cover:
A recent flood in Cambodia (courtesy of Mr. Ty Sokhun, Forest Management Office, Department of Forestry and Wildlife, Cambodia)
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. This publication was jointly prepared by Mr. Emmanuel M. de Guzman, Ms. Lotten Ekelund Kratt and Mr. Ti Le-Huu of the Sustainable Development and Water Resources Section, Environment and Sustainable Development Division; Mr. Marco Roncarati of the Social Emerging Issues Division; and Mr. Miguel Perez-Ludena of the Poverty and Development Division of ESCAP. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations or of the Governments of India, Indonesia and Sri Lanka. This document has been issued without formal editing.
ii
Preface The Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific 2007 (ST/ESCAP/2476) pointed out that the developing economies in the Asia-Pacific region grew by 8.2 per cent in 2007, up from 8.1 per cent in 2006, and are expected to continue to grow by about 7.7 per cent in 2008. The analysis therein shows that the region has made significant strides in economic and social progress during the past half century with per capita income growing at a much faster rate than elsewhere in the world. This remarkable achievement in socio-economic development during such a long period also indicates accomplishments in disaster risk management in most countries. However, the 2004 tsunami disaster, along with several other subsequent disasters, reminds us all that the Asia-Pacific region is most vulnerable to natural hazards. Disaster risk management will therefore remain among the most important challenges to sustainable development in the region. Over the last century, the Asia-Pacific region accounted for about 91 per cent of the world’s total deaths and about 49 per cent of the total economic damage due to the impact of natural hazards. In the region, losses caused by disasters are particularly damaging, depriving countries of resources which could otherwise be used for economic and social development. The loss from such disasters is most severe and tragic in the least developed and developing countries of the region, which set back development by many years or even decades as a result. In this context, regional cooperation in disaster risk management, especially in building the resilience of communities to disasters, is essential not only to cope with the increasing trend of losses and risks, but also to contribute to ensuring sustainable economic growth of the region. For this reason, ESCAP attaches great importance to assisting developing countries in the region, especially in the development of policies and strategies for more effective integration of disaster risk management into the socioeconomic development process. In this regard, ESCAP embarked on the initiative “Building Community Resilience to Natural Disasters through Partnership: Sharing Experience and Expertise in the Region”. The initiative promoted regional cooperation in disaster risk management and applied good practices to partnerships at the regional and national levels. Preparing this discussion paper is an important part of the initiative as it documents the process and outcomes of capacity building. In developing this paper, the great diversity of Asia and the Pacific was taken into account, including the complexity of socio-economic development processes in developing countries and also various innovations undertaken at the grassroots level. Moreover, the capacity-building process included national workshops in the three pilot countries, i.e. India, Indonesia and Sri Lanka, and the Concluding Regional Workshop on Sharing Experience and Expertise on Building Community Resilience to Natural Disasters through Partnership, held in Bangkok from 21 to 23 April 2008. The concluding regional workshop was attended by some 40 experts from nine ESCAP-member countries affected by the 2004 Tsunami, namely Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Maldives, Myanmar, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Thailand, and from the Secretariat of the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, the United Nations Development Programme, the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center, the Asian Disaster Reduction Center and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. This publication was jointly prepared by Mr. Emmanuel M. de Guzman and Ms. Lotten Ekelund Kratt under the direct supervision of Mr. Ti Le-Huu of the Environment and Sustainable Development Division, in collaboration with Mr. Marco Roncarati of the Emerging Social Issues Division, and Mr. Miguel Perez Ludega of the Poverty and Development Division of ESCAP. The contributions of all the expert representatives at the concluding regional workshop and also the resource persons of the three pilot projects are highly appreciated.
iii
The financial assistance provided by the Government of Republic of Korea through the Republic of Korea Tsunami Trust Fund at ESCAP and the generous support of the Governments of India, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka, and the respective project authorities of the three countries for the implementation of the pilot projects are profoundly appreciated. It is hoped that the discussion paper would serve as a background document for other regional meetings of experts on various aspects of disaster risk management, especially those on the development of the Indian Ocean Tsunami Early Warning Systems. It is also hoped that the paper would contribute to further strengthening regional cooperation in the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action towards achieving socio-economic development through disaster risk reduction in the region.
iv
Table of contents Page Preface .........................................................................................................................................
iii
Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................
vii
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................
ix
1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................
1
2. Building regional capacities for community resilience ................................................. 2.1 Defining community resilience ................................................................................. 2.2 Community-based approach to disaster risk management .................................... 2.3 Building resilience through partnership ...................................................................
2 3 6 7
3. Integrated early warning systems ..................................................................................... 3.1 Towards an effective early warning system ............................................................. 3.2 Lessons learned from Pilot Project A ...................................................................... 3.3 Recommendations ...................................................................................................
7 7 11 13
4. Livelihood recovery ............................................................................................................ 4.1 The livelihood approach to development ................................................................ 4.2 Lessons learned from Pilot Project B ...................................................................... 4.3 Recommendations ...................................................................................................
14 14 18 19
5. Recovery support to orphans, separated children, and youth ..................................... 5.1 Addressing social impacts of disaster in humanitarian action ................................ 5.2 Lessons learned from Pilot Project C ...................................................................... 5.3 Recommendations ...................................................................................................
20 21 22 24
6. Partnerships for Building Community Resilience .......................................................... 6.1 Public-private partnerships ...................................................................................... 6.2 Community and volunteers’ participation ................................................................ 6.3 Gender perspective and cultural diversity ............................................................... 6.4 Capacity building and technology transfer ..............................................................
25 25 26 26 28
7. Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................ 7.1 Strengthening stakeholder partnerships for community resilience to disasters ..... 7.2 Livelihood security and development ...................................................................... 7.3 Strengthening the social dimensions of communities ............................................. 7.4 Enhancing end-to-end early warning systems ........................................................ 7.5 Sustaining CBDRM and community development initiatives .................................. 7.6 Recommendations for action ...................................................................................
29 29 29 30 31 31 33
Appendix 1 References ............................................................................................................ Building resilience to natural hazards ................................................................................ Integrated Early Warning Systems .................................................................................... Livelihood recovery ............................................................................................................ Recovery support to orphans, separated children and youth (OSCY) ............................. Gender ................................................................................................................................
34 34 36 38 39 40
v
Table of contents (continued) Page Appendix 2 Meetings of the Capacity-Building Process in Pilot Project C ...................... Workshop on Strengthening Community Support for Orphans, Separated Children and Youth, 14-16 November 2006, Banda, Aceh, Indonesia ................................................... National Meeting on Policy Advocacy for Enhancing Community Resilience to Natural Disasters Focusing on Children and Youth, 20- 22 March 2007, Jakarta, Indonesia ...... Training Workshop on Youth Participation and Support Systems in the Aftermath of Disasters, 22 to 24 May 2007, Banda, Aceh, Indonesia ................................................... Follow Up Meeting on Policy Advocacy for Enhancing Community Resilience to Natural Disasters Focusing on Children and Youth, 24-26 July 2007, Jakarta, Indonesia ...........
42 42 42 43 43
List of figures Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure
1 2.1 2.2 3 4
Process of building regional capacities for community resilience ........................ The disaster cycle .................................................................................................. Overview of the pilot projects’ main contribution areas to community resilience Four elements of early warning systems ............................................................... The livelihood asset pentagon ...............................................................................
2 3 5 8 14
List of table Table 1
Estimated livelihood patterns in households affected by the tsunami in Tamil Nadu, India .............................................................................................................
18
List of photos Photo 1 Photo 2 Photo 3
The warning tower at Hikkaduwa, Sri Lanka ......................................................... The warning tower at Kulmanai, Sri Lanka ........................................................... The warning tower at Point Pedro, Jaffna, Sri Lanka ...........................................
vi
12 12 12
Acronyms and Abbreviations ADPC ADRC BAKORLAK PB BRR CBDRM CFS DMC DDMU DoM DFID DRR EAP ESCAP ESDD ESID FCCI HFA IASC IFRC IOTWS ISDR MDTF MHEWS MOSA NAD-Nias NGO OSCY PDD PPP PRSP PTSD RoKTTF SATKORLAK PBP SOP TEC TEWS UN UNDP UNICEF WB WMO
Asian Disaster Preparedness Center Asian Disaster Reduction Center National Disaster Management Coordinating Board, Indonesia Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency for Aceh, Indonesia community-based disaster risk management child friendly spaces Disaster Management Centre District Disaster Management Unit Department of Meteorology, Sri Lanka Department for International Development disaster risk reduction emergency action plan United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific Environmental and Sustainable Development Division of ESCAP Emerging Social Issues Division of ESCAP Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry Hyogo Framework for Action Inter-Agency Standing Committee International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies Indian Ocean Tsunami Warning Systems United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction Multi-Donor Trust Fund multi-hazard early warning system Ministry of Social Affairs, Indonesia Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency for Nias non-governmental organization orphans, separated children and youth Poverty and Development Division of ESCAP public-private partnership Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper post-traumatic stress disorder Republic of Korea Tsunami Trust Fund Provincial Disaster Management Coordinating Board, Indonesia standard operating procedures Tsunami Evaluation Coalition tsunami early warning system United Nations United Nations Development Programme United Nations Children’s Fund World Bank World Meteorological Organization
vii
Executive Summary Through more than three years since the Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunamis, the affected countries together with the international community have continuously endeavoured to rebuild the lives and livelihoods of countless victims. The Governments and communities concerned have embarked on and implemented noteworthy initiatives that aimed to rebuild the devastated communities with reduced vulnerability and risks and strengthened resilience to disasters. They endeavoured to promote sustainable and coordinated approaches in mitigating the impact of the tsunami and other possible disasters in the future. Inevitably, the process has created enormous experiences of countries in building community resilience from which important lessons may be drawn by all. In support of post-disaster recovery efforts of its member countries, ESCAP launched in May 2006 the initiative called Building community resilience to natural disaster through partnership: Sharing experience and expertise in the region. Targeting affected and vulnerable communities in India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Maldives, Myanmar, and Thailand, the initiative endeavoured to support the Governments of these countries in enhancing their technical capacity to promote and replicate good practices in disaster risk management and post-disaster recovery through partnerships. More specifically, the initiative intended to increase the access of Governments to innovative approaches to managing and reducing disaster risks and building community resilience through multi-stakeholder partnership at all levels. This was achieved through sharing of experience and expertise derived from the region, and particularly from three component pilot projects: (1) integrated, multi-hazard early warning systems in Sri Lanka, (2) livelihood recovery in India, and (3) recovery support to orphans, separated children, and youth in Indonesia. Lessons learned from these three pilot projects were complemented with additional experiences from the region and built into existing regional supporting mechanisms, thereby stimulating regional and national partnerships, building government capacities, and disseminating good practices on disaster risk management for possible replication or adoption by countries in the region. The initiative is funded through the Republic of Korea Tsunami Trust Fund (RoKTTF), which was established in July 2005 in an agreement between ESCAP and the Republic of Korea for projects with a focus on multi-hazard preparedness and comprehensive risk reduction, based on and linking national and regional capacities. The approach adopted for RoKTTF included early warning system (EWS) technology, education strategies, governance structures, community awareness, and related rehabilitation work in the context of sustainable development. In particular the projects would facilitate the sharing of inter-country approaches, expertise, experiences, and good practices. This paper was prepared as part of the concluding activities of the initiative, the assessment and dissemination of project outcomes, experiences, and lessons learned for the benefit of tsunamiaffected Governments in the region. It essentially summarizes the project outcomes and consolidates the regional experiences and learned lessons. It also includes comparative analyses of project outcomes and integration of key recommendations as presented and discussed at the concluding regional workshop held in Bangkok, Thailand, in April 2008. Moreover, this paper intends to facilitate the replication or adoption of national and local experiences elsewhere in the region and to promote meaningful partnerships.
ix
1. Introduction The Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunamis of 26 December 2004 caused an unprecedented human catastrophe in a number of ESCAP member states, destroying lives and livelihoods. Rehabilitation and reconstruction processes developed by the national Governments, with the support from the international community, have adopted sustainable and coordinated approaches to reducing disaster impact and risks on vulnerable communities. Of immediate importance was the development of integrated early warning systems, livelihood and infrastructure recovery, including human settlements, and social rehabilitation. Because of the overwhelming magnitude and impact of the tsunami disaster, a great deal of work remained in enhancing the capacity of Governments to manage the recovery process and to support the rehabilitation of communities. In July 2005, ESCAP signed a trust fund agreement with the Republic of Korea for projects with focus on multi-hazard preparedness and comprehensive risk reduction based on national and regional capacities. This approach included early warning system (EWS) technology, education strategies, governance structures, community awareness, and related rehabilitation work in the context of sustainable development. In particular, the projects intended to facilitate sharing of intercountry approaches, expertise, experiences, and good practices. Needs assessment missions were undertaken by ESCAP staff in Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka and the Maldives. Based on consultations with national counterparts and key UN partners, and through inter-divisional planning within ESCAP, the following areas of focus were proposed for the initiative: 1)
Introducing good practice in community-based warning terminals systems for national disaster information monitoring in Sri Lanka;
2)
Livelihood support for tsunami-affected communities in India through private-public partnership;
3)
Strengthening social support of orphans, separated children and youth (OSCY) in unregulated institutional care and on the streets in Indonesia.
ESCAP has considerable experience in the application of partnerships across public and private sectors, particularly in developing innovative approaches to community development. Coupled with ESCAP’s role in facilitating exchange of good practices in the region, this experience was applied fully in the planning and implementing the initiative. Thus, the initiative, Building Community Resilience to Natural Disaster through Partnership: Sharing Experience and Expertise in the Region, was embarked on. The overall goal was to enhance the technical capacity of the Governments in the region to replicate good practices in disaster risk management and post-disaster recovery through partnerships. In the process of implementation of the initiative, lessons learned from component pilot projects were complemented with additional experiences from the region and built into existing regional supporting mechanisms. 1 This was meant to stimulate regional and national partnerships, build government capacities and disseminate good practices on disaster management in the region.
1
For example, regional workshop, ESCAP partners, regional meetings, and expert groups such as the ICG WG6 on Mitigation, Preparedness and Response.
1
2. Building regional capacities for community resilience To contribute to existing regional knowledge base and standard setting, ESCAP has analyzed and disseminated the experiences from the three pilot projects for further development of policy and practice on community resilience building in the region. The figure below shows the dynamic process between the current regional knowledge base and practical community activities, which this initiative pursued. In using consolidated knowledge and expertise to support community activities that had generated new experiences, the regional knowledge base was strengthened further. Thus, the initiative became part of a continuous process of developing regional experiences and expertise in enhancing community resilience.
Knowledge base Assessment of regional needs and priorities for resilience. Partnerships
Project implementation Strengthening of local and national capacities.
Regional level
National and community level
Figure 1: Process of building regional capacities for community resilience
With this process, ESCAP assessed the prevailing needs in the tsunami-affected countries and found that much recovery work had to be done at the community level. It was thus important to consider lessons learned and to ensure that strategies and interventions would strengthen community resilience to natural hazards and are sustainable. After consultations with national counterparts and key regional partners, ESCAP identified three critical areas of concern and action: (1) Development of integrated early warning systems; (2) livelihood recovery; and (3) recovery support to orphans, separated children, and youth. As components of the overall initiative, the following three pilot projects were developed to address said critical areas.
Pilot Project A: A community early warning system for multiple hazards in Sri Lanka The objective of this pilot project was to develop and introduce possible models for community-based and multi-hazard early warning systems that would support the recovery process of the affected communities as well as the socio-economic development process of the country. This was achieved through the setting up of multi-hazard early warning systems in the three pilot communities in Sri Lanka.
2
Pilot Project B: Creating new sources of livelihoods in Tamil Nadu, India This pilot project explored the potential of public-private partnerships as means for creating new sources of livelihood in the wake of the tsunami disaster. In eliciting lessons and policy recommendations on partnerships, the pilot project supported the national Government, local government counterparts and community-based NGOs to engage effectively in public-private partnerships in livelihood development for vulnerable communities.
Pilot Project C: Capacity building to support OSCY in family and community settings in Aceh, Indonesia The objective of this pilot project was to strengthen the social support for OSCY and to enhance the protection availed in Indonesia. The intention was to help tsunami-affected communities adopt and apply strategies for providing care and support to OSCY and to promote their development in community settings.
2.1 Defining community resilience
S
T
PRE
E
R PA
EN
E THE EV FOR
MIT
IG
CT
EM
PA
N
Q UIE S C E N C
S TO R ATI O N
RE
N C Y P R E -I M
AT IO
C
N
E
RE
IO CON STRUCT
RE
RY
GE
BE
RE
N
VE
TER THE EVEN
NS
AT IO
O
AF
ER
PO
T
In disaster management, the process of human reaction to disasters is described as cyclical and having four phases, i.e. mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery (e.g., Comfort, Ko, & Zagorecki, 2004; Mileti, 1999).
IM PA CT D. Alexander, Principles of Emergency Planning and Management (Harpenden: Terra Publishing, 2002), p. 6. Source: http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/Literature/7520.pdf
Figure 2.1: The disaster cycle In this process, mitigation refers to the strengthening of a community’s capabilities and resilience to better cope with any future disaster. Preparedness involves the anticipation of an imminent disaster and the creation of a response capability. This includes analyzing probable threats, setting up warning and communication systems, response management structures, organizing training, and stocking supplies (Mileti, 1999). Response refers to the actions taken during and immediately after a disaster occurs, and focuses on saving lives, minimizing the damage to property and the disruption to the community. Recovery is the short-term to long-term phase of rebuilding the affected community with reduced risk and vulnerability and enhanced resilience to disaster. During this phase, damage assessment is undertaken to guide the reconstruction of housing and infrastructures and the re-establishment of community institutions. 3
In the cyclical process of disaster management, mitigation is the vital link. Similar to the creativity component of social resilience, mitigation concerns more than just preparing for, responding to, and recovering from a disaster. It involves implementation of the lessons learnt in the creation of new policies and activities that increase the community’s resilience (Mileti, 1999).2 Resilience refers to the capacity of a system, community or society potentially exposed to hazards to adapt, by resisting or changing in order to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure. This is determined by the degree to which the social system is capable of organizing itself to increase its capacity for learning from past disasters for better future protection, and to improve risk reduction measures.3 Several factors could define the community’s level of resilience. Among them are the capabilities and capacities of the community for preparedness, mitigation and recovery. Preparedness consists of activities and measures taken in advance to ensure response to the impact of disasters, including the issuance of timely and effective early warnings and the temporary removal of people and property from a threatened location. 4 Pilot Project A aimed at strengthening the tsunami early warning system for multiple hazards for vulnerable communities in Sri Lanka. Building early warning systems, that range from forecast and alert mechanisms at the regional level to ongoing efforts of the National Road Map to Disaster Risk Reduction for the local community population, was one of the key practices in supporting the preparedness of peoples and communities to future impacts of natural hazards. Mitigation refers to structural and non-structural measures undertaken to limit the adverse impact of natural hazards, environmental degradation and technological hazards. Structural measures refer to any physical construction to reduce or avoid possible impacts of hazards, which include engineering measures and construction of hazard-resistant and protective structures and infrastructures. Non-structural measures refer to policies, awareness, knowledge development, public commitment, and methods and operating practices, including participatory mechanisms and the provision of information, which can reduce risk and related impacts. 5 Pilot Project B worked on creating new sources of livelihood. By having a diversity of livelihood sources the capacity of the community for disaster mitigation is strengthened. For example, coastal communities could reduce their vulnerabilities to natural hazards such as tsunami if they would reduce their dependency on fishery as main source of income. The work on livelihood recovery highlighted the importance of building back better and contributed to increasing local capacity for disaster mitigation. Recovery refers to decisions and actions taken after a disaster with a view to restoring or improving the pre-disaster living conditions of the stricken community, while encouraging and facilitating necessary adjustments to reduce disaster risk. Recovery (rehabilitation and reconstruction) affords an opportunity to develop and apply disaster risk reduction measures. As
2
Maguire, B. and Hagan, B. 2007. Disasters and coomunities: Understanding social resilience. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, Vol. 22. No. 2. See website: http://www.ema.gov.au/agd/EMA/rwpattach.nsf/ VAP/(1FEDA2C440E4190E0993A00B7C030CB7)~16-20maguire.pdf/$file/16-20maguire.pdf 3 UN/ISDR. Terminology of disaster risk reduction. See website: http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/lib-terminologyeng%20home.htm 4 Ibid. 5 Ibid.
4
discussed above, recovery activities provide a crucial chance to rebuild community structures with disaster mitigation and risk reduction as an integral strategy.6 Pilot Project C concerned strengthening the social support of orphans, separated children and youth. Building functional social and institutional structures that care and bring children and youth back in community life was made an integral part of the community’s recovery process.
RESILIENCE
PREPAREDNESS
MITIGATION
RECOVERY
(A) Early warning system
(B) Additional sources of livelihood
(C) Support to orphans, separated children and youth
Figure 2.2: Overview of the pilot projects’ main contribution areas to community resilience
The figure above summarizes the connection between and among the three pilot projects and their respective contributions to community resilience. The attribution of work to the fields of preparedness, recovery or mitigation may seem theoretical and of little practical use. However, it was deemed important to analyze how the specific initiatives would relate to disaster risk management and contribute to community resilience. Such importance was inferred in the report of the Tsunami Evaluation Coalition (TEC). It indicated that a lot of recovery work in the aftermath of the tsunami lacked sufficient analysis and awareness of the long-term impacts and potential contributions of projects to building resilience, which resulted in failure to achieve sustainable solutions. In elaborating the links between relief, rehabilitation and development in the tsunami response, 7 TEC concluded: “In the shift toward development the strategies of disaster-affected people and those of the aid agencies have diverged. Most aid actors have demonstrated a limited understanding of what kinds of interventions may eventually prove sustainable with respect to livelihoods, market relations, community development and natural resource management. There is therefore a risk that many rehabilitation efforts may prove ultimately ineffective and unsustainable.”8
6
Ibid. Tsunami Evaluation Coalition. 2007. Evaluation of Links between Relief, Rehabilitation and Development (LRRD), Phase Two: Draft Approach Paper; See website: http://www.tsunami-evaluation.org/NR/rdonlyres/86D5EC4F17AE-42EE-90EA-01A146EC203C/0/LRRDPhase2ApproachPapershortversion.pdf 8 Ibid. 7
5
Moreover, it is not only the focus of recovery work that affects its sustainability. Equally important is the approach of its implementation. The TEC evaluation emphasized the importance of involving local actors and recognizing local capabilities in implementing recovery efforts in order to achieve sustainable solutions. “This evaluation also found that recovery is complex – early engagement with local actors in the relief effort is essential for success in recovery and reconstruction. In addition, when the international community engaged with local capacities (actors, institutions and markets), social inequalities and exclusions were better addressed. When local capacities were ignored, social inclusion of the most needy remained an often unsuccessful effort. The tsunami evaluation found that when international agencies are able to resist the pressure to spend quickly and facilitate local efforts for meaningful recovery, achievements of the assistance become sustainable.” 9
2.2 Community-based approach to disaster risk management A common approach in the three pilot projects was the focus on enhancing the capacities of communities to build their resilience to disasters. The approach of community-based disaster risk management (CBDRM), in which the local community plays a vital role in recovery, mitigation, and preparedness, has been increasingly supported by the international community. It was acknowledged that the exchange of information and experiences together with capacity building of communities would be important in ensuring sustainability of disaster risk reduction initiatives. “It is important that ownership of the disaster context is not stripped from local people by external interference. There is a growing appreciation of the need for disaster reduction activities to be based on more attentive participatory approaches involving local communities as much as possible, considering them as proactive stakeholders and not passive targets for intervention” 10 Experience showed that the post-disaster reconstruction period would provide the best time to introduce disaster risk reduction into sustainable development planning. When perceived as a distinct set of activities, risk management initiatives were often placed in competition with other environmental and developmental objectives, rather than being seen as integral parts of the same whole. Therefore, political commitment and social acceptance of the value of risk reduction would be necessary to increase the sustainability of communities.11 “CBDRM is a process in which at-risk communities are actively engaged in the identification, analysis, treatment, monitoring and evaluation of disaster risks in order to reduce their vulnerabilities and enhance their capacities (ADPC, 2003). This means that people are at the heart of decision making and implementation of disaster risk management activities. […] The involvement of most vulnerable social groups is considered as paramount in this process, while the support of the least vulnerable groups is necessary for successful implementation.” 12 At present, various efforts to adopt the CBDRM approach are underway and active discussions on the effectiveness of various modalities to apply the approach have been encouraged.
9
Ibid. ISDR. 2004. Living with risk. Website: http://www.unisdr.org/eng/about_isdr/basic_docs/LwR2004/ ch1_Section2.pdf 11 Ibid. 12 Abarquez, I. and Murshed, Z. 2004. Community-based Disaster Risk Management: Field practitoners’ handbook. ADPC. p. 9. 10
6
The ESCAP initiative is one of its efforts to contribute to the promotion of the approach with the emphasis on the importance of community involvement in decision-making processes in ensuring sustainability of community development efforts.
2.3 Building resilience through partnership No one stakeholder, a government agency or non-governmental organization, can effectively take on the task of reducing disaster risks alone. Disaster risk reduction calls for a multi-sector and multi-stakeholder approach. Therefore, in building community resilience to natural hazards, partnership-building among stakeholders at all levels, local, national and regional, is essential and fundamental. This has been highlighted in the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) as among the key principles in implementing disaster risk reduction. The HFA constitutes the primary international agreement for disaster reduction amongst 168 countries and multilateral institutions including the World Bank and the UN system. The principal strategic goal of HFA is to more effectively integrate disaster risk considerations into sustainable development policies, planning, and programming at all levels and it is directly relevant to the World Bank’s country assistance strategies and poverty reduction strategy papers (PRSPs). Recognizing the importance of interdisciplinary approach, the ESCAP initiative was managed and coordinated through the joint efforts of three divisions concerned, i.e. Environmental and Sustainable Development Division (ESDD), Poverty and Development Division (PDD), and Emerging Social Issues Division (ESID). The three pilot projects were coordinated respectively by these three divisions, sharing knowledge and experiences and making efficient use of multilateral systems and regional technical and institutional resources throughout project implementation.
3. Integrated early warning systems Several coastal communities of Sri Lanka were seriously affected by the 2004 tsunami disaster. The death toll was about 40,000 people and socio-economic damage was extensive. In the aftermath of the disaster, the Government of Sri Lanka, like the other Governments in the region, has strengthened the integration of disaster risk reduction measures into development planning and practice. In this regard, ESDD, through Pilot Project A, has supported such Government efforts. The project considered the development of efficient and effective early warning systems as a critical strategy to prevent natural hazards from translating into disasters that set back socio-economic development.
3.1 Towards an effective early warning system Early warning is crucial to disaster risk reduction as it prevents loss of life and reduces the socio-economic impact of disasters. An early warning system is considered complete and effective when communities at risk are actively involved and the following four elements are fully integrated and strongly interlinked: (1) risk knowledge; (2) monitoring and warning service; (3) dissemination and communication; and (4) response capability.13
13
UNISDR. Platform for the Promotion of Early Warning. See website: http://www.unisdr.org/ppew/whats-ew/ basics-ew.htm
7
RISK KNOWLEDGE
MONITORING & WARNING SERVICE
Systematically collect data and undertake risk assessments Are the hazards and the vulnerabilities well known? What are the patterns and trends in these factors? Are risk maps and data widely available?
Develop hazard monitoring and early warning services Are the right parameters being monitored? Is there a sound scientific basis for making forecasts? Can accurate and timely warnings be generated?
DISSEMINATION & COMMUNICATION
RESPONSE CAPABILITY Build national and community response capabilities Are response plans up to date and tested? Are local capacities and knowledge made use of? Are people prepared and ready to react to warnings?
Communicate risk information and early warnings Do warnings reach all of those at risk? Are the risks and warnings understood? Is the warning information clear and useable?
Source: UN/ISDR Platform for the Promotion of Early Warning
Figure 3: Four elements of early warning systems
Integrated and comprehensive The UN/ISDR Platform for the Promotion of Early Warning describes the inter-linkage and integration of the four elements: “Good early warning systems have strong linkages between the four elements. The major players concerned with the different elements meet regularly to ensure they understand all of the other components and what other parties need from them. Risk scenarios are constructed and reviewed. Specific responsibilities throughout the chain are agreed and implemented. Past events are studied and improvements are made to the early warning system. Manuals and procedures are agreed and published. Communities are consulted and information is disseminated. Operational procedures such as evacuations are practiced and tested. Behind all of these activities lies a solid base of political support, laws and regulations, institutional responsibility, and trained people. Early warning systems are established and supported as a matter of policy. Preparedness to respond is engrained in society.”14 Many stakeholders in disaster risk reduction have appreciated the importance of integrated early warning system. As shown and explained above, all four elements are vital to a whole early warning system, and without sufficient integration between and among them, the system may couldfail. The tsunami experience has shown that even with sufficient knowledge and technical monitoring present in some regions, the early warning information might not reach the countries and communities at risk. In the above context of the integration, the term end-to-end early warning was used to refer to early warning systems that are comprehensive, inclusive of all essential elements and considerate of overarching and cross-cutting issues. 14
Ibid.
8
Multi-hazard approach A challenge to early warning system has been to link all hazard-based systems, to help the public better understand the prevailing risks in their midst, and to be able to easily adjust to social and environmental changes as well as global challenges. This challenge, therefore, calls for a multi-hazard early warning system. “Many regions in the world are affected by more than one hazard, such as floods, storms, droughts or earthquakes with devastating socio-economic impacts. Early warning systems have been summarized as key elements for preventing and reducing the impact of disasters. As most communities face the threat of numerous hazards, it is important that integrated, multi-hazard warning systems are established. The functionality of a multi-hazard warning system will be improved by using shared structures and communication channels. A multi-hazard system will be triggered more often and hence, processes and links will remain better ‘exercised’. […] Cost-benefit ratios play an important role in raising the political will to invest in early warning and prevention.” 15
People-centred participation and response Apart from integration, the other crucial aspect of an early warning system is the ability to anchor the system upon the society and communities at risk. To be effective functionally, the early warning systems must be people-centred. “To be effective, early warning systems must be understandable, trusted by and relevant to the communities which they serve. Warnings will have little value unless they reach those people most at risk – who must be trained to react on the message. […] In short, what is needed is a culture of preparedness and risk reduction in vulnerable communities. The lesson is that without the right knowledge and tools, people will not know how to act on the early warning information and to help others. Developing systems that are people-centred is central to achieving this goal.” 16 Furthermore, the tsunami disaster has conveyed that even the most advanced early warning system in the world could accomplish only but a part of its objective, i.e. to alert governments of an impending disaster. Such a system would fail to warn the huge populations at risk across the region in the shortest possible time, unless it is people-centred. This has been a great challenge since.17 Another challenge to early warning systems has been to link all hazard-based systems, to help the public better understand the prevailing risks in their mindsets, and to be able to easily adjust to social and environmental changes as well as global challenges. This challenge, therefore, calls for a multi-hazard early warning system.
15 UN/ISDR. 2006. Early warning from concept to action. The conclusions of the Third International Conference on Early Warning. See website: http://www.ewc3.org/upload/downloads/Early_warning_complete2.pdf 16 Letz, H. 2006. Community-based preparedness and response to multi-hazard early warning: Background document for Session 5. Contribution of IFRC. See website: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/dpm/ews_ symposium_2006/documents/5.1.%20HorstLetz,%20Community-Based%20Preparedness%20and%20 Response%20to%20Multi-Hazard%20Early%20Warning.pdf 17 Gunawardene, N. 2005. A long ‘last mile’: the lesson of the Asian tsunami. Science and Development Newtork. See website: http://www.scidev.net/Opinions/index.cfm?fuseaction=readOpinions&itemid=456&language=1
9
“Many regions in the world are affected by more than one hazard, such as floods, storms, droughts or earthquakes with devastating socio-economic impacts. Early warning systems have been summarised as key elements for preventing and reducing the impact of disasters. As most communities face the threat of numerous hazards, it is important that integrated, multi-hazard warning systems are established. The functionality of a multi-hazard warning system will be improved by using shared structures and communication channels. A multi-hazard system will be triggered more often and hence, processes and links will remain better ‘exercised’. […] Cost-benefit ratios play an important role in raising the political will to invest in early warning and prevention.” 18 Fundamentally, an early warning system detects at an early stage potential hazards and, by technical and social channels, activates a prepared response by the community. The part of activating a prepared response is crucial to saving lives which is the main purpose of the system. An early warning is useless when the people who receive it do not know what to do with it. Some studies consider this gap as the weak link in the system. Bridging this gap is often referred to as bridging the “last mile”. “It is essential that communities understand the risks they face, respect the warning service and know how to react. Education and preparedness programmes play a key role. It is also essential that disaster management plans are in place, well practised and tested. The community should be well informed on options for safe behaviour, available escape routes, and how best to avoid damage and loss to property.”19 Community and people-centred participation is essential in order to identify needs and patterns of vulnerability and to develop the legitimacy necessary to ensure that warnings are acted upon. At the same time, information on regional weather conditions or other factors relating to a specific risk needs to flow down from regional and global monitoring systems to civil society. These bottom-up and top-down approaches are important in addressing gaps in early warning systems. Moreover, awareness raising, training, risk assessments, contingency planning, and response preparedness are important activities for strengthening the system and building the capacity of the community.20 During the period 2006-2007, ESCAP conducted a regional assessment of the unmet needs in the development of tsunami early warning system in the Indian Ocean region. This assessment indicated the need to further strengthen multi-hazard approaches and to integrate tsunami early warning systems into national development processes. Furthermore, the report indicated the need for more efforts focused on the ‘last mile’ components.21
18 UN/ISDR. 2006. Early warning from concept to action. The conclusions of the Third International Conference on Early Warning. See website: http://www.ewc3.org/upload/downloads/Early_warning_complete2.pdf 19 UN/ISDR. 2006. Developing early wraning systems: A checklist. See website: http://www.unisdr.org/ppew/ info-resources/ewc3/checklist/English.pdf 20 Letz, H. 2006. Community-based preparedness and response to multi-hazard early warning: Background document for Session 5. IFRC. See website: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/dpm/ews_symposium_2006/documents/ 5.1.%20HorstLetz,%20Community-Based%20Preparedness%20and%20Response%20to%20Multi-Hazard%20 Early%20Warning.pdf 21 Chow, K. 2007. ESCAP Report on Regional Unmet Needs and Recommendations – Tsunami Early Warning System in the Indian Ocean and Southeast Asia. See website: http://www.unescap.org/pmd/documents/TSU-Mapping Study-100807.pdf
10
3.2 Lessons learned from Pilot Project A Funded by grants from the Republic of Korea and supported technically by ESCAP, Pilot Project A pursued the enhancement of early warning systems in Sri Lanka. This involved the identification of coastal communities at risk of natural hazards and the construction of tsunami early warning towers in Hikkaduwa, Kulmanai, and Point Pedro, Jaffna. The towers were designed jointly by local and foreign experts and constructed by a local contractor under the supervision of the project’s equipment supplier. These towers could withstand up to 100-km wind force and two meter-high tsunami waves. The towers were equipped with warning facilities that enable the sounding of emergency warning sirens and the transmission of voice messages from the Central Emergency Operation Centre in Colombo directly to the communities at risk in the event of mass evacuation. The sirens are activated by landline telephones or remote satellite systems. Tests at the Hikkaduwa site indicated that the maximum distance the siren sound could travel varied from 500 to 1,500 meters, depending on the time of day. It was observed however that lightning strikes and frequent power failures had caused maintenance problems for which remedial measures were introduced. The pilot project has shown that it was possible to manufacture locally early warning towers at significantly reduced cost without compromising standards. Moreover, in operating the towers, the training of tower operators at local and central levels needed to be conducted periodically and supported with emergency drills made part of the annual work plan. Moreover, the construction of 50 other emergency tsunami towers in vulnerable communities was initiated based on the experiences of stakeholders. The presence of emergency warning towers in the communities tended to build people’s confidence in the system. In this regard, the Department of Meteorology (DoM) of Sri Lanka expressed readiness to issue weather forecast through the Disaster Management Centre (DMC) for the benefit of fishing communities and tourists. While there was expressed interest by key stakeholders to improve early warning dissemination and communication, there was, however, an evident need to develop standard operating procedures (SOP) for sharing emergency information with intermediate actors or institutions including police and media, District Disaster Management Units (DDMUs), and with last mile linkages. The effectiveness of the procedures had to be tested and evaluated thoroughly through drills. In one dialogue meeting, stakeholders mentioned the importance of placing emergency DART buoys in strategic off-shore locations to benefit Sri Lanka. Had buoys been placed strategically off-shore, Sri Lanka could have withdrawn much earlier the tsunami warnings of September 12, 2007 following the 8.2 magnitude earthquake in South Sumatra, Indonesia. 22 DoM, which raised this point, claimed that proper installation of buoys could help improve the effectiveness of tsunami early warning systems in the future. Based also on the 12 September 2007 experience, the discussions among stakeholders on district preparedness raised the need to further strengthen early warning dissemination, to involve community-based organizations more actively at the district level, and to enhance cooperation with DDMUs.
22
Colombo Page. See websirte: http://www.colombopage.com/archive_07/September12134259SL.html
11
Photo 1: The warning tower at Hikkaduwa
Photo 2: The warning tower at Kulmanai
Photo 3: The warning tower at Point Pedro, Jaffna
12
In summary, the discussions pointed out the following gaps: 1)
Lack of detailed standard operating procedures at the level of DDMUs to effectively disseminate early warning messages received;
2)
Media’s (especially electronic media’s) tendency to overact, airing disaster reports that contributes to instability and widespread public panic;
3)
Police forces lack briefing and understanding to efficiently manage and/or control major traffic congestion on main roads;
4)
Vertical evacuation structures in certain areas are necessary to facilitate emergency escape routes for emergencies involving mass populated areas. In the eastern coast, where the tsunami was predicted to strike, people were found largely scattered on the road;
5)
The breakdown of the communication system, resulting from a system overload, restricted the main tower’s function to disseminate emergency warning messages. This was aggravated by confusion pending the withdrawal of early warning messages;
6)
The establishment of satellite communication is necessary to effectively initiate early warning messages in disaster or tsunami-affected coastal areas.
The DDMC agreed to prepare the draft SOP and submit it to the DMC by the end of May 2008. Assistance may be required to improve further the SOP and to train all partners on their use.
3.3 Recommendations The pilot project revealed that the livelihood activities that would benefit most from early warning systems are mainly in fisheries and tourism sectors. Moreover, based on field consultations and studies on how an early warning system could effectively reduce the impacts of natural hazards on people’s lives and livelihoods, the following recommendations were made: 1)
Develop standard operating procedures for early warning as part of efforts to strengthen institutional frameworks for multi-hazard early warning systems at the national level, with clear assignment of roles, responsibilities and accountabilities among agencies concerned, including the DMC and its nationwide network of DDMUs;
2)
Identify decision makers in emergency information dissemination and involve them in developing standard operating procedures and accountability systems towards enhanced systems efficiency;
3)
Encourage active community participation in developing standard operating procedures for grassroots level to ensure local acceptability and practicability.
4)
Finalize approval of emergency standard operating procedures in the presence of key stakeholders, including Government and community groups, and ascertain the clarity of the procedures to all;
5)
Conduct frequent emergency warning drills that ensure the active participation of all stakeholders in the process.
6)
District disaster management coordinators (DDMC) should organize and establish committees for early warning at the community level, and initiate the development of the hazard maps and evacuation plans.
7)
Identify and train community leaders and volunteers in search and rescue and first aid.
13
8)
Consider the use of traditional warning systems such as temple bells, messengers, etc., and also hand-held megaphones and loudspeakers mounted on vehicles in disseminating warning messages.
9)
Address the request of DDMCs for internet and e-mail facilities to improve the communication with the DMC for receiving information faster.
4. Livelihood recovery Implementing another component of the ESCAP initiative, the Poverty and Development Division of ESCAP (PDD), conducted the pilot project on livelihood recovery and development in the district of Nagapattinam, Tamil Nadu, India. As Pilot Project C, it supported the development of new sources of livelihood through public-private partnerships towards reduced vulnerability and increased resilience of the community to natural hazards.
4.1 The livelihood approach to development Livelihoods are about the ways and means of ‘making a living’. “Livelihoods essentially revolve around resources (such as land, crops, seeds, labour, knowledge, cattle, money, social relationships and so on), but these resources cannot be disconnected from the issues and problems of access and changing political, economic and socio-cultural circumstances.” 23
Livelihood assets A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources) and activities required for a means of living (Carney, 1998:4). There are five types of asset or capital upon which livelihoods are built. The matter of enhancing the access to these assets is of primary concern in supporting livelihood development and poverty reduction. The inter-relationships between the various assets are represented by the pentagon model below.24 Human capital
Social capital
Natural capital
Physical capital
Financial capital
Source: DFID Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheet.
Figure 4: The livelihood asset pentagon 23
Parott, N. et. al., Livelihoods. Larenstein University of Professional education. See website: http://www. livelihood.wur.nl/index.php?s=A1-Livelihood 24 Department for International Development (DFID). 2001. Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets, London. See websites: http://www.nssd.net/references/SustLiveli/DFIDapproach.htm#Guidance; http://www.nssd.net/pdf/ sectiont.pdf; and http://www.fao.org/docrep/008/a0273e/a0273e04.htm
14
The five types of asset or capital are defined as follows: 25 O
Human capital represents the skills, knowledge, ability to labour and good health that together enable people to pursue different livelihood strategies and achieve their livelihood objectives.
O
Social capital is the social resources upon which people draw in pursuit of their livelihood objectives. These are developed through networks, relationships of trust and membership of more formalized groups.
O
Natural capital is the term used for the natural resource stocks from which resource flows and services (e.g. nutrient cycling, erosion protection) useful for livelihoods are derived.
O
Physical capital comprises the basic infrastructure and producer goods needed to support livelihoods.
O
Financial capital denotes the financial resources that people use to achieve their livelihood objectives.
Sustainable livelihood and disaster risk reduction Disasters impact on all these livelihood assets. “Hazards affect natural capital (e.g., floods that ruin agricultural land), physical capital (e.g., loss of housing, tools), financial capital (e.g., loss of savings), human capital (e.g., loss of life, injury, unemployment) and social capital (e.g., damage to social networks).”26 In this regard, livelihood development strategies must be aimed also at reducing vulnerability to natural hazards. “The livelihood strategies adopted by households and communities to reduce their vulnerability to hazards and recover from hazard events can be diverse, ranging from physical measures (e.g., building flood embankments, strengthening houses) to social/organizational actions (e.g., reinforcing social support networks, establishing local disaster preparedness committees) and livelihood diversification.” 27 Moreover, a livelihood is considered sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks and maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets both now and in the future, while not undermining the natural resource base.28 This description of sustainable livelihood conveys the relationship between livelihood, vulnerability and resilience, and infers the relevance and significance of disaster risk reduction initiatives to sustainable livelihood development. Therefore, supporting people’s livelihoods is about reducing people’s vulnerabilities, which is intrinsically linked to efforts to reduce poverty and disaster risks as well as to build capacity and resilience. In the post-tsunami recovery work, it was shown that a disaster could represent both crisis and opportunity. Among the opportunities derived from the tsunami disaster has been in raising awareness of gaps in strategies and appreciating the importance of reducing risks and vulnerability in the recovery process. Also, the tsunami disaster is, among others, “an opportunity to understand the neglected emphasis on livelihood aspects in the post-tsunami rebuilding phase.” 29 25
Ibid. ProVention Consortium Secretariat. Tools for mainstreaming disaster riks reduction: Sustainable livelihood approaches. Guidance Note 10. See website: http://www.proventionconsortium.org/themes/default/pdfs/tools_for_mainstreaming_GN10.pdf 27 Ibid. 28 Ibid. 29 Mr. Amjad Bhatti of the Rural Development Policy Institute of Pakistan, co-author of the book, Livelihood Centred Approach to Disaster Management – a Policy Framework for South Asia, speaking at the book launching event in Colombo, Sri Lanka. See website: http://practicalaction.org/?id=disasters_livelihood_approach 26
15
“Livelihood diversification is central to poor people’s coping strategies, but is generally overlooked in disaster mitigation programmes. […] Relief and rehabilitation should contribute to vulnerability reduction – they should not simply reconstruct the existing risk. This requires earlier intervention, more emphasis on rebuilding livelihoods and encouraging positive socio-economic change. […] Livelihood recovery is a priority for disasters’ victims but influxes of relief goods and outside labour can undermine local markets and income earning opportunities. […] Many ‘safe housing’ programmes after disasters may have little impact because they do not take sufficient account of communities’ needs, preferences and capacities. Participatory approaches based on local skills and appropriate technologies offer the best chances of long-lasting success.”30 The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) also provided its experience on the relationship between livelihood recovery and disaster risk reduction: “Livelihoods recovery in relation to disasters is often spoken of in a reactionary way: a post-emergency effort that helps people generate income for better economic self-sufficiency. However, livelihoods support can also relate to disaster risk reduction in a number of ways. Helping people secure stable or diversified income that can withstand disaster threats means they have better control over their lives despite suffering endured. Putting in place sustainable mechanisms that enable people to recover quickly from livelihood losses can mitigate the damaging effects of natural catastrophes. In the meantime, some initiatives that aim to make communities and their environment less susceptible to disasters serve to protect their livelihoods at the same time. Participatory approaches are often used to involve the entire community in identifying the beneficiaries and directing the interventions to reduce potential tensions between those who receive assistance and those who do not.”31 TEC also documented the experiences of tsunami-affected communities in the post-tsunami recovery. Experiences with humanitarian organizations in the rebuilding of livelihoods pointed to instances of misplaced emphasis, ineffective strategy, and marginalization of the poor and vulnerable, such as below. “Re-building communities and livelihoods is more complex and takes longer than building houses or distributing goods. The concentration on distribution of assets, especially boats, demonstrated a failure to understand and support diversified and sustainable livelihoods and communities. Affected people have frequently complained that NGOs deal only with village officials and that poorer people are marginalized. At best, the international response restored the ‘status quo ante’. At worst, it strengthened those who were better off and/or more articulate, such as fishermen who possessed boats, while marginalizing those who had few assets, notably women and the most poor.”32
30 Twigg, J. 2004. Good Practice Review: Disaster Risk Reduction. Humanitarian Practice Network. See website: http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/Literature/7520.pdf 31 IFRC. 2007. South/Southeast Asia and East Africa: Earthquake and Tsunamis – Fact Sheet No. 31. See website: http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/KHII-76T9MB?OpenDocument 32 Tsunami Evaluation Coalition. 2006. Joint evaluation of the international response to the Indian Ocean tsunami: Synthesis Report. See website: http://www.tsunami-evaluation.org/NR/rdonlyres/2E8A3262-0320-4656-BC81EE0B46B54CAA/0/SynthRep.pdf
16
As TEC had reported, large aid flows with demands on tangible and short-term results have in many cases created misdirected and unsustainable efforts on livelihood recovery. This problem was also observed and addressed in the recovery work in Tamil Nadu, India, as narrated below. “A range of livelihoods across the Tamil Nadu coast were affected by the tsunami. While fishery based livelihoods such as fishing, fish drying and vending, boat making, etc., were the first to be summarized as requiring rehabilitation, it soon became apparent that a large percentage of people on the coast dependent on other livelihoods, particularly agriculture and informal sector occupations, were affected as well. It is quite apparent that both the government and civil society organizations have largely adopted a property-centric relief and rehabilitation policy, with the result that livelihood rehabilitation packages predominantly reach only people who own boats and go out for deep sea fishing, and people who have tangible assets like shops. The thousands who contribute to the coastal economy by providing their labour and skills, like landless agricultural labourers, share croppers and tenant farmers; various categories of fish and boat workers; street vendors and petty traders; transport workers; construction labourers; salt pan workers; people involved in inland; shoreline and estuary fishing; service providers like barbers, tailors and cobblers, and crafts persons such as basket-weavers, have all found themselves sidelined and disregarded. Women survivors have also been marginalized in a similar manner, as they rarely possess assets in their name, and typically eke out a livelihood in the informal sector, often delivering services. Fortunately, these lacunae in the livelihood rehabilitation policy have been summarized by the government, and civil society organizations are being actively encouraged to focus on groups overlooked by state policies.” 33 From the working paper, “From Post-Tsunami Emergency Assistance to Livelihood Recovery in South India”, the following discussion highlights the problem with relief work that focuses on few and tangible outputs as well as with the lack of proper needs assessments in the affected communities. “In the case of post-tsunami Tamil Nadu, it may be argued that direct livelihood relief assistance should not have gone beyond the restoration of pre-disaster economic conditions. However, most assistance has been primarily used for housing reconstruction and replacement of fishing equipments, beyond real or well evaluated needs locally. Paradoxically, very little relief has been channelled to any other sector of possible economic rehabilitation. Just a few NGOs have also provided assistance to coastal farmers in restoring the fertility of their lands affected by the tsunami invading saline sea water (Geethalakshmi, 2006). This sectoral over concentration of aid has resulted in an oversupply of new houses and in a fishing overcapacity (estimated at 70 per cent above pre-tsunami level).” 34
33
http://www.un.org.in/untrs/reports/care2005rep.pdf Reigner, P. 2007. From post-tsunami emergency assistance to livelihood recovery in South India: Exploring the contribution of microentrepreneurship initiatives in the Gulf of Mannar, Tamil Nadu – A Working Paper. See website: http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWFiles2007.nsf/FilesByRWDocUnidFilename/TKAI-73E396-Full_Report.pdf/$File/ Full_Report.pdf 34
17
4.2 Lessons learned from Pilot Project B Partnership for livelihood recovery The objective of Pilot Project B was to build capacities of national Governments, local governments and NGOs in forming public-private partnerships (PPP) to support livelihoods of vulnerable communities. In particular, the pilot project intended to develop new sources of livelihood through partnerships for the most affected communities in the district of Nagapattinam in the state of Tamil Nadu, India. The project achieved this through the implementation of relevant component activities, documentation of experiences, and dissemination of lessons learned. The project was implemented in partnership with Development Promotion Group (DPG), a local NGO. The pilot district, Nagapattinam, was one of the areas seriously affected by the Indian Ocean tsunami. In this district of 1.5 million people, over 6,000 people died and almost 200,000 were evacuated when the tsunami struck. Material losses were also heavy in 38 villages: 12,821 cattle were lost, 5,114 hectares of land damaged and 8,774 fishing boats destroyed. The disaster hit 40 per cent of the population in the poorest affected areas, mostly living below the poverty line. One third belonged to scheduled castes or scheduled tribes. While fishing was the main source of livelihood in this district, years of overexploitation of the fishing resources was already a reality before the tsunami disaster. In fact, reconstruction efforts have actually increased the capacity of the fishing fleet, aggravating the district’s economic problem. Agriculture and livestock were less important as an economic activity, but the loss of standing crops and death of livestock may have had a disproportionate effect on the livelihoods of women and disadvantaged groups. The resulting salinity of the lands would have medium-term impact on agricultural productivity.
Table 1: Estimated livelihood patterns in households affected by the tsunami in Tamil Nadu, India Sectors
Number of households
Fisheries
120,000
Microenterprises
90,000
Agriculture and livestock
29,000
Others
161,000
Total
400,000
Source: “India Post-Tsunami Recovery Programme Preliminary Damage and Needs Assessment”; Asian Development Bank/United Nations/World Bank, New Delhi, India. March 8, 2005.
This project fostered a partnership between the district community and the private company to develop a business opportunity in which both parties could benefit. Three specific opportunities were identified in a study conducted by an independent consultant: garment manufacturing, jatropha cultivation for bio-diesel and dried-fish production. After extensive consultations with the communities, private companies and other stakeholders, garment manufacturing was selected as the most promising business opportunity. Although garment manufacturing was the most feasible industry to implement for the pilot project, it proved very difficult to attract private companies to this venture. The assumption that garment manufacturers in Tiruppur, home to the largest manufacturers in India, would be willing to move some facilities to a lower-cost area such as Nagapattinam, has proved false. As an alternative, the local partner agreed to start the garment unit independently of any company, and seek
18
partnership once the unit was operational. For this reason, the training of workers was slow and the quality of the products was below industry standards. Women were considered most apt for the garment option, and moreso with the fact that they lacked sources of income in their villages where fisihing has been the predominant source of livelihood. An alternative income focused on women was considered the best way to improve the livelihoods of the communities. On 13 April 2007 the project inaugurated the training unit in the village of Velankani. Equipped with 25 sewing machines, the unit was able to train 50 women drawn from nearby communities affected by the tsunami. In August 2007, the unit started producing garments for the local market and generated income for 25 women. In 2008, the unit would expand with the acquisition of new machines and a larger venue. It was planned that the quality of production would be upgraded and agreements with established manufacturers would be made. The workers were organized into self-help groups. Overall, the project was able to build their capacity to assume responsibility in managing the unit. The process and results of the pilot project were documented and disseminated by ESCAP in collaboration with other international agencies, the Government of India, and private sector groups concerned with the project.
Overcoming local challenges in project implementation Economic development in Nagapattinam was hampered by common perception of industrialists that the district was remote and a difficult place to do business. Actually, the district is relatively close to the industrial areas like Tiruppur, but the poor transportation and lack of industrial tradition continued to discourage business investors. The project tackled this problem by forming a manufacturing unit that worked first for the local market and slowly improved its quality and would look for partners outside the district. At one point, the private companies expressed their concerns about the managerial control over the company that was to emerge from the partnership with the community. In building the partnership, a careful balance must attained in giving enough managerial autonomy to the company while encouraging the active participation of the community. Organizing the workers in self-help groups was considered the best option for transferring ownership and management control.
4.3 Recommendations In response to the perceived lack of interest of industrialists in coming to a relatively remote district, the project organized a workshop together with the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FCCI) in the district of Nagapattinam on 12 March 2008. This attracted 70 participants from the Government, private business sector, and civil society from within the district and the rest of the state. The analysis of the investment climate in the district of Tamil Nadu raised three important points: (1) the importance of investing in physical infrastructure; (2) the importance of skills development; and (3) the lack of bank finance, that was often rooted in the low capacity of local companies to present business cases to the banks.
19
Below is a summary of the findings and recommendations of the pilot project: 1)
The promotion of economic development strategies in affected areas should be at a level comparable to that of the economic conditions existing prior to the tsunami disaster. This was necessary to enhance the resilience of community-based livelihoods and to recover quickly from impacts of natural hazards. There was no such thing as absolute livelihood security, as any economic activity was subject to external shocks. A diversified business livelihood in a community setting was deemed more secure than businesses concentrated on a single industry or resource.
2)
Livelihood security, in a rural community setting, required short-term and long-term actions. Short-term actions should focus on the prevailing economic activities within the community to improve productivity and the income derived from them. Long-term actions should look into the larger economic prospect of business expansion and source specific livelihoods and economic activities that are new to the affected area. Consultations with the business community is necessary, provided it works towards sourcing the best investment strategies and it ensures that the right source of livelihoods is realistically promoted towards the development of rural district recipients.
3)
Micro-finance was a feasible business strategy for livelihood security. But the proliferation of self-help groups in India after the tsunami drew public attention to their sustainability problems. Self-help groups required consistent funding and there was an underlying need to break their low level of savings and investment and sustainability problems by increasing their operation scale.
4)
Considerations of social constraints should strictly be observed in target rural areas to ensure that livelihood promotion efforts would reach the poorest recipients. Rent-seeking privileged classes could monopolize these applied gains from any increased economic activity. In the case of the fishing communities in India, where the ESCAP pilot project was implemented, the gender gap in income earning opportunities was particularly remarkable, which was an important consideration for the project strategy.
5. Recovery support to orphans, separated children and youth35 The Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami of December 2004 caused enormous loss of human life, wide-spread destruction of infrastructure and property, and serious damage to the environment in Aceh, Indonesia. Its socio-economic impact on Aceh was unprecedented as it killed 130,406 people, displaced 504,518 and caused damage estimated by the Government at US$ 5 billion, which was tantamount to the annual GDP of Aceh.36 During Aceh’s recovery and reconstruction following the tsunami disaster, ESCAP embarked on initiatives to help build community resilience through multi-stakeholder partnerships. A component of this initiative was the pilot project on building capacity to support orphans, separated children and youth (OSCY) in family and community settings in Aceh. Coordinated by the Emerging Social Issues Division (ESID) of ESCAP, this component pilot project addressed an important emerging social concern: the prevalence of children and youth orphaned or separated by the tsunami. This 35
This chapter draws extensively from the parallel discussion paper under the same project, entitled: “Enhancing Community Resilience to Natural Disasters: Lives of Children and Youth in Aceh”. 36 ADB News and Events, March 3, 2006. See website: http://www.adb.org/Media/Articles/2005/6618_tsunami_ impact_Indonesia/
20
social group manifested a serious condition of vulnerability that required immediate support long-term interventions for recovery from psychological trauma, for protection from abuse trafficking, and for early return to normal community life. The project considered addressing particular vulnerability of OSCY as an important humanitarian and social recovery strategy entails capacity building and contributes to economic and social development of the country.
and and this that
5.1 Addressing social impacts of disaster in humanitarian action Understanding the vulnerability and needs of particular social groups OSCY has emerged as a social group most vulnerable to disaster. In the wake of the tsunami, lives of children and youth who survived presented various needs and situations that required the help and care of the community. “Child and youth separation from parents and relatives, child neglect, child abuse and child trafficking, have been noted as untoward circumstances that have taken place in the aftermath of the big tsunami.” 37 Oxfam underscored the importance of knowing the needs and understanding the situations of vulnerable groups in the efforts to build disaster resilient communities. “In order to truly understand the social impacts of disasters, and to manage and prevent adverse consequences, we must understand the impacts of disasters on particular groups (Oxfam, 2005). Moreover, it is important to identify the potential ‘fracture points’ or social cleavages within a community. From this, it may be possible to predict future breakdowns in social resilience in disasters, and to design preventative initiatives.”38 Understanding the resulting needs, vulnerability, and risk of particular social groups following a disaster allowed for better appreciation of the opportunities for policy reform and systems improvement, among others, toward reduced risk and enhanced community resilience. “Efforts to strengthen the communities as future potential caregivers of OSCY should become a priority in the government policy on child protection. In line with this argument, the Head of Dinas Sosial Aceh (Social Service Office, Aceh) emphasizes: ‘We need to look at a great opportunity open in front of us. That is a great chance to change the form of child protection from an emergency preoccupation to long-term child protection at the community level that will provide a protected environment for the children of Aceh.’ (Technical Advisor, 2006)”39
Adherence to agreed principles and guidelines Immediately following the earthquake and the tsunami, a number of organizations held a series of discussions to design and to agree on certain principles and guidelines in implementing psychosocial support programmes. However, questions arose regarding the extent to which their resepective programme activities adhered to the guidelines. A senior representative of ChildFund commented that a lot of actors, many new, did not always know or respect the existing guidelines. 40
37
Pilot Project C Report. Maguire, B. and Hagan, B. 2007. Disasters and coomunities: understanding social resilience. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, Vol. 22. No. 2. See website: http://www.ema.gov.au/agd/EMA/rwpattach.nsf/VAP/(1FEDA2C440E4190E0993A00B7C030CB7)~16-20maguire.pdf/ $file/16-20maguire.pdf (Australia 2007). 39 Pilot Project C Report. 40 Pilot Project C Report. 38
21
Coordination in disaster relief assistance The coordination among government agencies and other stakeholders at national and local levels was considered a determinant of effective disaster relief assistance. Poor coordination had led to delayed policy decisions and, consequently, delayed social support and inequitable distribution of emergency livelihood assistance to victims.41
Integrating psychosocial intervention in humanitarian action The passage of time seemed to have eased the psychological trauma of tsunami survivors. However, the socio-cultural trauma of the affected communities manifested through strong feelings of uncertainty among the people required much longer time to heal. Moreover, it was observed that the disaster caused, beyond personal losses, the loss of social support as well as social capital such as good relations, strong ties, mutual trust, and interdependence. This prevailing social and economic condition should be taken into account in addressing the protection and future of affected children.42 In September 2007, international humanitarian organizations agreed on a new set of guidelines to address the mental health and psychosocial needs of survivors as an integral component of humanitarian action. However, there seemed to be an organizational tendency to relegate instead psychosocial interventions to the specialists. “The Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings clearly state that protecting and promoting mental health and psychosocial well-being is the responsibility of all humanitarian agencies and workers. Until now, many people involved in emergency response have viewed mental health and psychosocial well-being as the sole responsibility of psychiatrists and psychologists.”43 In the case of humanitarian organizations that integrated psychosocial interventions in their humanitarian response, addressing the needs of children was undertaken through different approaches. The approach of World Vision was noteworthy. “Child Friendly Spaces (CFS) is an intervention that World Vision uses for children who have experienced complex humanitarian emergencies. CFSs offer children a safe place to play, make friends, learn, and do homework. At the same time, they provide staff with a chance for interaction and importantly the opportunity to identify children who are not responding well to their grief and need additional support. Playing is healing for children. Providing a safe space is instrumental in helping children deal with their grief.”44
5.2 Lessons learned from Pilot Project C Pilot Project C intended to strengthen the social support for the care and development of OSCY by engaging the community and advocating partnership among key stakeholders, i.e. Government, private sector, civil society, and the community. In this regard, the project examined in Aceh the prevailing recovery needs, the state of community resilience and the existing local capacity 41
Pilot Project C Report. Pilot Project C Report. 43 Save the Children. 2007. New Guidelines to Improve Psychological and Social Assistance in Emergencies. See website: http://www.savethechildren.org/newsroom/2007/guidelines-psychosocial.html. 44 Pilot Project C Report.report 42
22
to support OSCY. Accordingly, the project organized and facilitated multi-stakeholder dialogues, policy advocacy meetings and training workshops. Constituting the project’s capacity-building process, these activities enabled the sharing of experiences, good practices and lessons learned and collective social planning by stakeholders at different levels. The details of these activities are in Appendix 2. Through its capacity-building process, the pilot project elicited relevant issues and important lessons particularly in strengthening community preparedness for disaster response, mitigating disaster impacts on society and building community resilience. The following is a synthesis of the main lessons learned from the project. 1)
While the importance of multi-stakeholder coordination in disaster management is widely appreciated, its actual practice in times of disaster has proved not to be easy. Some humanitarian agencies and organizations have perceived coordination as a constraint to immediate delivery of relief and aid to victims. This may explain why less than one third of the number of NGOs in Aceh and Nias has worked under the coordination of the Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency for Aceh, Indonesia (Badan Rehabilitasi dan Rekonstruksi, BRR) and the Nias Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency (NAD-Nias).
2)
The passage of time could have helped lessen the psychological trauma of tsunami survivors; however, the socio-cultural trauma evidenced by strong feeling of uncertainty among the survivors has lingered. In this regard, a more extensive psychosocial intervention programme should be established with care and services made more available and accessible to disaster victims.
3)
Prolonged relief assistance and charity support are counter-developmental as they tend to increase the dependency of disaster victims on external aid. In this regard, recipients of external aid should be made aware of the extent, limits and emergency nature of relief assistance. On the one hand, local stakeholders, including local government, NGOs and community leaders, should be aware of their responsibility to ensure that early recovery is achieved and community resilience is enhanced. On the other hand, international aid agencies should ensure that their respective exit strategies allow the development of local capacity to address prevailing needs and gaps in the community.
4)
At the community level, disaster exacerbates poverty, disrupts social fabrics and weakens local capacities. In the aftermath of a disaster, the loss of community leaders, including religious leaders who provide moral guidance, significantly reduces social cohesion within the community. Thus, a community reeling from the impact of a disaster cannot be expected to assume full responsibility of the needs of OSCY without external assistance.
5)
One of the detrimental impacts of disaster is on family union. In the aftermath of the tsunami, the poverty of families has compelled children be relegated to orphanages or children’s homes that provided food, shelter, and schooling. In response, the Government has built more children’s homes to meet the increasing demand for them. Nevertheless, the need to determine collectively the best approach to address this social phenomenon has remained. Moreover, the potential contributions of youth to the process of social reconstruction cannot be underestimated. Activities enthusiastically participated in by youth, such as the October 2006 drug awareness campaign of ChildFind Indonesia, indicate clearly the significant role of youth in building community resilience against disaster.
23
5.3 Recommendations Strengthening community resilience to disasters is essential in protecting vulnerable populations, especially youth, from the damaging impact of disaster on society. The process of building community resilience entails, among others, partnerships and synergies, concerted and collective actions, and comprehensive social planning by all stakeholders. Developing OSCY into productive members of the community calls for long-term development strategies and programmes that foster freedom of expression, empowerment and active involvement of youth in socio-economic development. Drawn from the project, the following are among the important areas of consideration and recommendations on strengthening community resilience and developing more relevant and responsive policies on OSCY in Aceh and elsewhere in the region.
Early warning system, information dissemination and disaster management 1)
The national and provincial coordination mechanisms for disaster management (BAKORLAK PB and SATKORLAK PBP, respectively) need to be strengthened for more effectiveness, clearer functions and roles of members, and more efficient decisionmaking processes at all levels, that involve women and youth in the community.
2)
Official information service centres need to be established in disaster-prone areas in order to provide the people and the media with accurate and reliable information on risk, warning and needs, verify pertinent information made available on the internet, and help avoid unnecessary panic and miscommunication among the general public.
Educating communities and building capacity, knowledge and skills 3)
Areas of NGO cooperation should be broadened beyond the provision of psychosocial and livelihood support, to include transfer of knowledge and technology for strengthened disaster management capacity of local NGOs.
4)
School curricula should have disaster education subjects in order for students to acquire practical knowledge in disaster preparedness and response. Disaster-prone communities should also acquire training in community-based disaster risk management (CBDRM) and become knowledgeable on reducing disaster risks.
5)
Community members should be provided with adequate pre-disaster and post-disaster knowledge and conduct relevant research to support knowledge management.
Addressing the needs of vulnerable groups 6)
Technical and operational procedures for implementing and coordinating emergency assistance and social protection programmes should be established. They should include standard procedures for the quality assurance of humanitarian services, the issuance of work permits for stakeholders and the handover of children centres to communities.
7)
A comprehensive database on the conditions and needs of children and youth would have to be established so that relevant and responsive programmes can be designed and responsibilities in implementing them can be systematically shared among government agencies and civil society organizations.
24
8)
A comprehensive referral system from the village level to the provincial level should be established to address the needs and concerns of children and youth, including opportunities for health care and education, with special attention given to those with disabilities.
9)
A trauma centrer should be set up with adequate and trained professional medical staff who would provide continuous services to children and adults who have not fully recovered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
10)
Religious and customary leaders should be engaged to be more active in providing children and youth with religious and moral guidance so that they behave according to socially accepted norms and values.
Building community resilience 11)
Community resilience to disaster could be strengthened by (a) building people’s knowledge and understanding of disaster risks; (b) providing relevant, reliable and timely life-saving information; (c) enhancing community preparedness for emergency response; and (d) building the capacity of people to manage livelihood and microfinance activities that lead to improved quality of life and standards of living.
12)
Policies, plans and procedures for implementing disaster response and recovery programmes and for providing social support to vulnerable groups such as youth, should be established with (a) clearly defined roles and responsibilities of stakeholders; (b) mechanisms for participatory decision making and effective multi-agency and multi-level coordination; and (c) strategy for developing local capacity for self-sufficiency before ending any external assistance or turning over responsibilities to the community.
13)
Mechanisms to address gender issues and to protect children and youth from violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation should be incorporated into support systems and made an integral part of preparedness and response plans and measures.
14)
Education, health and employment are key issues which should be addressed by capacity development programmes aimed at building the resilience of communities. The media plays an important role in disseminating information and advocating for the rights of children and youth in times of disaster.
15)
The development of stronger and more dynamic partnerships and synergy, collaboration and coordination among government agencies, NGOs, and international organizations, and other key stakeholders, could enhance resilience to disaster at all levels.
6. Partnerships for Building Community Resilience 6.1 Public-private partnerships In view of the call for greater private sector involvement in DRR, the development of public-private partnerships (PPP) has been promoted and pursued as a creative strategy for DRR. The Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) attaches great importance to this strategy through which Governments and the private sector could effectively contribute to the mission to reduce disaster risks. In this regard, the United Nations continues to attach great importance to the development of public private partnerships, especially for DRR at all levels.
25
Risk sharing and transfer has emerged as a viable PPP strategy. This strategy pursues the fourth priority of the HFA for building the resilience of communities and nations, i.e. to reduce underlying risk factors. Effective reduction of disaster risks requires to put in place functional social and financial safety mechanisms. In this respect, insurance and micro-finance are increasingly recognized now as effective mechanisms for risk sharing and transfer and thus risk reduction. Moreover, the advantages that the partnerships can provide to stakeholders such as enhanced resources; increased capacity for disaster recovery, prevention and mitigation; and reinforcement of social bonds, among others, are increasingly appreciated. In such partnerships, every organization, private, public or civil, that is a stakeholder of a common disaster risk must contribute to the common efforts to prevent, reduce or transfer disaster risks towards building safe and prosperous communities.
6.2 Community and volunteers’ participation Community participation refers to the active involvement of people in making decisions concerning processes, policies, and programme activities which affect them. In DRR, community participation is fundamental as it aims to enable communities to exercise and demonstrate the ownership of initiatives and measures to protect themselves more effectively against the impact of hazards. Participation is a means to this end.45 The community, especially the most vulnerable and at risk, is the ultimate beneficiary of DRR efforts at any level. It bears the brunt of disaster impacts. Yet, in a disaster situation, the community itself must necessarily respond first before any outside help arrives. Community-based organizations and volunteer groups are often the first responders. In this regard, building the capacity of the community becomes an imperative. Community-based disaster management is considered a fundamental strategy in building local capacity for DRR, which engages the active involvement of and leads to strong local support and sense of ownership and responsibility over grassroots DRR initiatives. Community participation is also desired in disaster risk management, because in many cases there is a missing link between the disaster response actually needed and what is provided through humanitarian action. Moreover, community-level organization, management and empowerment are essential to mitigate the effects of disasters. Community structures need to be formalized, and their role and capacities in disaster management strengthened. The government and non-government institutions should work with community structures. In general, community organizations serve as an important bridge and instrument to link the ground-level responses to a higher level of decision making.
6.3 Gender perspective and cultural diversity Gender dimensions Natural hazards, people’s physical exposure, socio-economic vulnerability, and limited capacity to manage and reduce risks combine to result in disaster situations. The complex interplay of dynamic social factors such as poverty, social class, age group and gender relations, ethnicity and other socio-cultural factors has determined the capacity of communities to reduce their disaster vulnerability and risks. Of these, gender is increasingly summarized as a fundamental dimension of disaster risk reduction and its crosscutting relevance and correlation with development issues and
45
Twigg, J. 2004. Good Practice Review: Disaster Risk Reduction. Humanitarian Practice Network. p. 119. See website: http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/Literature/7520.pdf
26
concerns, including poverty, health and livelihood, are also increasingly appreciated. In this regard, a gender perspective is also being called for in addressing climate change adaptation, environment and resource management, and governance. Gender relations in DRR reflect deep-seated imbalances towards women in terms of opportunities, rights and decision-making power. Gendered identities, attitudes, and expectations are unfavourable to women in our societies, leading to gender inequality, cutting across all socioeconomic development sectors. In addition, women’s household tasks and responsibilities largely limit women’s mobility and access to information and resources. Clearly, gender-based differences in roles and responsibilities in the home and in the wider society result in women and men having different life experiences, which lead to differences in vulnerabilities to disasters and capacities to reduce disaster risk. In reality, while women’s vulnerability to disasters is often highlighted, their role in fostering a culture of resilience and their active participation in enhancing the disaster resilience of nations and communities have been often overlooked. Women are largely marginalized in the development of DRR policy and decision-making processes and their voices usually go unheard. Women’s contributions to DRR have not yet been adequately summarized. In addition, women’s limited access to information and knowledge inevitably increases their and their families’ vulnerabilities and risks to disasters.
Gender issues The marginalized status of women and the current deficiencies in considering gendered vulnerabilities and risks in DRR call for increased awareness of these existing imbalances and for greater resolve and commitment to collaborative actions to address them. Among the important gender issues and concerns include the following: 1.
More women die than men as the direct and indirect result of natural disasters. This effect is strongest in countries with very low social and economic rights for women. In contrast, in those countries, in which women in their everyday lives have almost equal rights to men, natural disasters kill men and women about equally.46
2.
Gender powerfully shapes human responses to disaster, both directly and indirectly. Women are especially hard-hit by the social impacts of environmental disasters.
3.
Gender inequality is a root cause of women’s disaster vulnerability. Global forces and social changes placing more people at greater risk of disaster also disproportionately impact women.
4.
Women are not universally or identically impacted by disasters. Highly vulnerable women have specific needs and interests before, during, and after disasters.
5.
Gender shapes capacity as well as vulnerability. Women are active and resourceful disaster responders but often regarded as helpless victims.
46 Neumayer, E. and Plumper, The gendered-nature of natural disasters: The impact of catastrophic events on the gender gap in life expectancy: 1981-2002. See website: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/geographyAndEnvironment/ whosWho/profiles/neumayer/pdf/Disastersarticle.pdf#search=%22The%20Gendered%20Nature%20of%20Natural%20 Disasters%22
27
Gender perspectives in DRR and the HFA Gender is a cross-cutting issue in disaster resilience.. The Hyogo Framework for Action highlights this and calls for the integration of gender perspective into disaster risk reduction efforts. Moreover, building disaster resilience effectively requires the recognition and participation of all members of nations and communities. It is in this regard that the Gender and Disaster Network, at the first meeting of the Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction in June 2007, called upon Governments as well as regional, international and non-governmental organizations, to recognize clearly gender within the HFA as follows:47 1.
Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and local priority which explicitly summarizes gender as a cross-cutting concern requiring attention throughout response, recovery, rehabilitation, preparedness and mitigation phases of disaster reduction planning;
2.
Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning, recognizing that the daily routines and social conditions of women and men, girls and boys place them differently at risk, and engage them in different networks of communication;
3.
Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels and for all members of nations and communities, based on a solid knowledge base of gender-disaggregated data, tools and information;
4.
Reduce the underlying risk factors which result in differential levels and occasions of vulnerability and endangerment, and shape the capacities and resources of women and men to minimize harm; and
5.
Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels by promoting the inclusion of women in disaster-related professions where they are under-represented, and actively engaging with grassroots women’s groups, scaling up their effective solutions through partnerships, to enhance resilience in families and communities.
Challenges The pursuit of DRR with a gender perspective is a major challenge today. Along with this challenge is to bring conceptual clarity in the interface between and among gender, DRR and sustainable development. In understanding gender as a common link in sustainable development pursuits, stakeholders in DRR are enabled to consider mainstreaming gender into DRR and development processes and activities, including humanitarian response and post-disaster recovery activities. Gender inclusive and sensitive policies and programmes in DRR are expected to yield substantial positive outcomes in poverty reduction and skills development, among others. In view of this, UN/ISDR has a standing call for active documenting and sharing of lessons learned and good practices in mainstreaming gender into DRR.
6.4 Capacity building and technology transfer Early warning systems are more efficient and effective when they are designed and established with the people in the community as end users in mind. The use of supportive technologies for early warning systems is very helpful when they are appropriate and acceptable to the local users, especially in conveying and disseminating information on prevailing hazards and risks. 47
Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction, First Session, Geneva, Switzerland, June 2007; Statement from Dr. Maureen Fordham, Head of Delegation, Gender and Disaster Network. See website: http://www.preventionweb.net/ globalplatform/first-session/docs/Wednesday_Statements/Org_and_Other_Statements/GDN_Statement.pdf
28
A number of tools are available to convey information to technical experts and decision makers as well as to communicate real time forecasts and warnings to the public. These tools are necessarily interactive to allow easy updating, developing scenarios and providing visual and quantitative information on the state of conditions during the forecast event. Geographic information systems (GIS) provide a computer-based information and manipulation system useful in support of forecasting and monitoring hazard impact as well as emergency response. Hazard risk maps are valuable information and communication tools for disaster risk reduction. The process of its making also presents an opportunity for the communities to become more aware of the prevailing hazard risks in their midst, the probable disaster impacts, and the appropriate mitigation, preparedness and response measures they could undertake. Capacity building for the community and hazard forecasting agency include the development and use of these tools. In instances where technology transfer is required, the adoption of these tools is undertaken with careful regard for local knowledge and practices.
7. Conclusions and Recommendations To consolidate and discuss the conclusions and recommendations of the three pilot projects, ESCAP conducted the Concluding Regional Workshop on Sharing Experience and Expertise on Building Community Resilience to Natural Disasters through Partnership from 21 to 23 April 2008 in Bangkok, Thailand. The workshop was attended by national and local stakeholders from the pilot communities, resource persons, and ESCAP officers concerned. The following are the conclusions and recommendations agreed upon during the workshop.
7.1 Strengthening stakeholder partnerships for community resilience to disasters Community-based disaster risk management (CBDRM) is viewed as an approach that enables and empowers the community to manage risks and to take responsibility for community development planning and programme implementation, and consequently leads to the improvement in people’s quality of life and the environment. It is inextricably linked to social, economic, and environmental development goals. Mutli-stakeholder partnership is essential in implementing CBDRM. Strengthening such partnership is seen as an effective strategy to build community resilience to disasters as well as local capacity to undertake programmes for socio-economic development. As CBDRM is implemented in various forms, the need for a strong leadership role of the national coordinating agency for disaster risk management in promoting stakeholder partnerships becomes evident in ensuring the sustainability of CBDRM programmes. In this regard, the role and responsibilities of the Government and other primary stakeholders in ensuring long-term sustainability and promoting local ownership of development programmes as well as good governance must be well defined.
7.2 Livelihood security and development The project component in the state of Tamil Nadu, India, highlighted the importance of investing in physical infrastructure and skills development. It also reported that the lack of bank
29
finance was often rooted in the low capacity of local companies to present business cases to the banks. Moreover, the following issues pertinent to livelihood security and development were raised: 1)
A difference must be made between livelihood recovery and livelihood security, as well as between short-term and long-term interventions for livelihood development.
2)
Stakeholder consultations on developing and promoting alternative sources of livelihood are a critical process that must involve private business groups.
3)
Micro-finance (including micro-insurance) is an important tool for enhancing livelihood security from disasters. Although there are some experiences on these tools for the poor, these are for the time very limited.
4)
Efforts in enhancing livelihood security from disasters and for development need to be examined further. The improvement of livelihood for development must be an ongoing process.
5)
Barriers to livelihood development, including existing gender gaps, need to be identified and addressed adequately.
7.3 Strengthening the social dimensions of communities The project component on social support systems for tsunami-affected communities in Indonesia and India highlighted the importance of the following: 1)
Building social networks, including self help groups (SHGs), and government intervention to ensure the access of the poor to credit.
2)
Establishing a decision-making village committee which has equitable representation by women, youth, traditional and religious leaders and government representatives.
3)
Replicating good practices in social network formation as platforms for advocacy issues and participation in policy development.
Moreover, the discussions on the various social issues in CBDRM indicated the need for the following courses of actions: 1)
Develop legal bases for CBDRM.
2)
Ensure effective linkages between national and local platforms.
3)
Develop enabling mechanisms and protocol for multi-sectoral participation and involvement.
4)
Enhance accountability through effective monitoring systems, explicit benchmarks and indicators for assessing impact.
5)
Develop standards for effective integration of CBDRM into the development process.
6)
Take account of gender perspectives and address related issues.
7)
Adopt holistic approaches to addressing child vulnerability and livelihood.
8)
Improve psychosocial interventions.
9)
Consider the role of teachers and pupils, and schools as resilient centers.
10)
Conduct training of trainers.
11)
Explore insurance schemes.
30
7.4 Enhancing end-to-end early warning systems The project component on enhancing end-to-end early warning systems in Sri Lanka generated the following findings: 1)
It is important for early warning systems to be community-based, multi-hazard and linked to socio-economic development.
2)
Most community-based early warning systems have focused on saving lives and efforts to link them with socio-economic opportunities are limited.
3)
The downscaling of early warning systems from national to community levels is a professional challenge, and experiences in empowering users of early warning systems are not available.
4)
There is a need to develop models on empowering users of early warning systems for socio-economic development and to undertake pilot projects, among others.
5)
Developing partnerships with relevant agencies and working with communities are essential in sustaining the system.
6)
The Colombo workshop recommended, among others, more time for warning dissemination, finalizing the SOP, forging agreements among relevant government agencies, and conducting drills with active participation of stakeholders.
The discussions and sharing of experiences on end-to-end early warning systems conveyed the following important messages: 1)
Transcending the usual focus on preparedness for response is the challenge at hand in enhancing end-to-end early warning systems. The systems need to be linked to risk mitigation and development planning.
2)
A commonly observed weakness has been the non-reliability of some existing communication systems for early warning systems.
3)
The difficulty of analyzing hazard risk data and the need to depend on technical professionals in the development and issuance of warnings were summarized.
4)
An education component in the development of standard operating procedures for early warning systems is important.
5)
Translating warning alert signs to ways people could easily understand is essential.
6)
Malaysia can assume the role of a “regional tsunami watcher”.
7.5 Sustaining CBDRM and community development initiatives In addition to the above, the following CBDRM concerns, sustainability issues, and visions and directions for the future were shared: 1)
On transforming the Tsunami Early Warning System (TEWS) into a multi-hazard early warning system, the following key elements for such transformation were identified: a)
Enhancement of a disaster risk information management system i)
Using information as a tool for local empowerment
ii)
Strengthening data collection and dissemination
iii)
Improving coordination of information sharing through appropriate legal support 31
iv) v) b)
c)
Sustainability of local processes and systems for risk communication and early warning i)
Ensuring the efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability of the process of communicating risk and early warning information to end users (technological, technical sustainability, managerial and social ownership)
ii)
Research and development on the use of indigenous resources and local systems toward better ownership by the community
Replication of good practices i)
2)
3)
Risk assessment by the Government and developing risk maps together with the people Investing in enhancing the role of the community as end-users in the smooth flow of risk information and early warning
Identifying good practices in tsunami early warning systems, particularly in the efficient and effective flow on information, and replicate them in the development of multi-hazard early warning systems.
On promoting CBDRM, Public-Private Partnership (PPP) and micro-finance, the workshop discussions yielded the following conclusions: a)
In view of the limited good practices in PPP and micro-finance, there is a need to examine further how CBDRM and micro-finance could be integrated in the context of socio-economic development.
b)
There is a need for mechanisms that ensure the efficient exchange of information between governments and communities and the appropriateness and relevance of local interventions.
c)
There is a need for integration between the funding systems for disaster and development toward ensuring that disaster risk management is made an integral part of development planning.
d)
The Government should lead in providing the enabling environment, policy framework and implementation strategy for PPP for DRR.
e)
Strengthening good governance and accountability in fund use is important.
On promoting CBDRM, PPP and insurance, the workshop discussions yielded the following conclusions: a)
There is a need to identify and examine existing models of Governments reinsuring or contracting insurance for potential disaster losses.
b)
Damage forecasting is an important tool in prioritizing disaster risks based on potential impacts and forecast losses.
c)
There is a need for an enabling environment and mechanisms for policy development on disaster risk transfer: i)
There is a need to study the different tools, mechanisms and approaches to enable Governments to embark on disaster risk transfer policy.
ii)
There is a need to ensure the involvement of the community from the very start of the policy development process.
iii)
There is a need to ensure the involvement of community-based organizations in PPP and insurance arrangements.
32
4)
iv)
At the regional level, ESCAP may develop the criteria and safeguards for PPP and disaster risk insurance.
v)
ESCAP may coordinate collaborative activities in PPP and disaster risk insurance among member countries.
Envisioning the future of CBDRM The future evolution of CBDRM was envisioned by the participants as follows: a)
Legal basis and framework for CBDRM exist.
b)
Institutional arrangements including Government support for CBDRM are sustained.
c)
DRR as a community programme is a Government priority and engages all partner stakeholders in the development and implementation of the programme.
d)
The roles of the Government, the private sector and the community as stakeholders are clear and well defined.
e)
Stakeholders’ roles in CBDRM are enhanced and involve academia, the media, and civil society, among others.
f)
The effective role of professional associations (such as MPBI of Indonesia) in promoting DRR is examined and explored for possible replication.
g)
A roadmap exists for engaging effectively PPP in CBDRM at various stages of disaster risk management. PPP sustains CBDRM initiatives.
h)
Programmes for climate change adaptation exist and enable the community to transform natural hazards into development opportunities.
7.6 Recommendations for action The following recommendations were made: 1)
Enhance multi-stakeholder partnerships in building community resilience to disasters and integrating CBDRM firmly in long-term community development.
2)
Promote the effective transformation of the Tsunami Early Warning System (TEWS) to a multi-hazard early warning system through the enhancement of the disaster risk information management system, the sustainability of local processes and systems, and the replication of good practices, towards the enhanced role of the community in making the flow or communication of risk information and warning more efficient and effective.
3)
Study further the various ways and means to enhance livelihood security from disaster, address identified barriers to livelihood improvement including gender gaps, and ensure that livelihood development for socio-economic development is a sustained process.
4)
Examine existing models of PPP for micro-finance and disaster risk transfer or insurance and the effective role of the community in PPP arrangements.
5)
Engage ESCAP to coordinate regional collaborative activities and assist member countries in examining, promoting and replicating good practices on CBDRM, PPP, micro-finance and risk transfer, livelihood development, social support services, and multi-hazard early warning systems, among others.
6)
Convey the messages of this concluding regional workshop to the forthcoming Third Asian Ministerial Conference on Disaster Reduction. 33
Appendix 1 References Building resilience to natural hazards Total Disaster Risk Management – Good Practices Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC), (January 2005) http://www.adrc.or.jp/publications/TDRM2005/TDRM_Good_Practices/Index.html (See also Good Practices 2006 Supplement) Sustainable Recovery and Resilience Building in the Tsunami-affected Region Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) Programme to support the region’s recovery from the tsunami through the generation of knowledge and capacity building. http://www.sei.se/index.php?section=risk&page=projdesc&projdescpage=9999 Partnerships for Disaster Reduction – Southeast Asia, Phase 4 (PDRSEA 4) http://www.adpc.net/echoesmay07/Contact.html Philia – a dialogue on caring citizenship Resilience http://www.philia.ca/cms_en/page1116.cfm Regional Workshop on Lessons Learned and Best Practices in the Response to the Indian Ocean Tsunami Report and Summary of Main Conclusions United Nations (UN), (June 2005) http://www.reliefweb.int/library/documents/2005/ocha-tsunami-05jul.pdf Intergovernmental Coordination Group for the Indian Ocean Tsunami Warning and Mitigation System (ICG/IOTWS) http://ioc3.unesco.org/indotsunami/ Intergovernmental Coordination Group for the Pacific Tsunami Warning and Mitigation System (ICG/PTWS) http://ioc3.unesco.org/ptws/index.htm ISDR – International Strategy for Disaster Reduction http://www.unisdr.org Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (UN/ISDR, World Bank) http://www.unisdr.org/eng/partner-netw/wb-isdr/wb-isdr-GFDRR.pdf Good Practice review – Disaster Risk reduction Mitigation and preparedness in development and emergency programming John Twigg (UN/ISDR) (March 2004) http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/Literature/7520.pdf
34
Building Disaster Resilient Communities, Good Practices and Lessons Learned A Publication of the “Global Network of NGOs” for Disaster Risk Reduction (UN/ISDR, UNDP) (June 2007) http://www.unisdr.org/eng/about_isdr/isdr-publications/06-ngos-good-practices/ngos-goodpractices.pdf Lessons for a Safer Future: Drawing on the experience of the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster Eleven key actions for building nations’ and communities’ resilience to disasters (UN/ISDR) (January 2007) http://www.unisdr.org/ppew/tsunami/pdf/lesson-for-a-safer-future.pdf Tsunami 2004 – India – Relief, Rehabilitation, Reconstruction An information center of the South Indian Federation of fishermen Societies (SIFFS) http://www.tsunami2004-india.org/ Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) http://www.adpc.net Community-based disaster risk management (CBDRM) Publications (ADPC) http://www.adpc.net/v2007/Programs/CBDRM/Publications/Default-Publications.asp Building Disaster Risk Reduction in Asia: A Way Forward ADPC Looks Ahead To 2015 (ADPC) (December 2004) http://www.adpc.net/v2007/IKM/ONLINE%20DOCUMENTS/downloads/kobe.pdf Natural disaster preparedness and education for sustainable development (UNESCO) (2007) http://www.adpc.net/v2007/IKM/EVENTS%20AND%20NEWS/DISASTER/2007/Downloads/ Natural_Disaster_Preparedness_and_Education_for_Sustainable_Development.pdf ProVention Consortium Working in partnership to build safer communities and reduce disaster risk http://www.proventionconsortium.org/ South Asia Earthquake 2005 – Learning from previous recovery operations This briefing provides a synthesis of key lessons from post-disaster recovery programmes. http://www.odi.org.uk/alnap/publications/pdfs/ALNAP-ProVention_SAsia_Quake_Lessonsb.pdf The 2007 ProVention forum: Making Disaster Risk Reduction Work (ProVention Consortium) (2007) http://www.proventionconsortium.org/themes/default/pdfs/Forum_2007_report.pdf Tsunami Evaluation Coalition (TEC) http://www.tsunami-evaluation.org/ Evaluation of Links between Relief, Rehabilitation and Development (LRRD), Phase 2: Draft Approach Paper (TEC) (March 2007) http://www.tsunami-evaluation.org/NR/rdonlyres/86D5EC4F-17AE-42EE-90EA-01A146EC203C/0/ LRRDPhase2ApproachPapershortversion.pdf
35
Thematic and cross-cutting studies (TEC) http://www.tsunami-evaluation.org/Other+Evaluations+and+Reviews/Thematic+and+Crosscutting+Studies.htm Consolidated Lessons and Recommendations from the TEC Synthesis Report (TEC) (January 2007) http://www.tsunami-evaluation.org/NR/rdonlyres/60B4A417-43CA-4B2A-A4EE-E208F10760E7/0/ SynthReport_Tables.pdf Joint evaluation of the international response to the Indian Ocean tsunami: Synthesis Report (TEC) (July 2006) http://www.tsunami-evaluation.org/NR/rdonlyres/2E8A3262-0320-4656-BC81-EE0B46B54CAA/0/ SynthRep.pdf GTZ – Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit http://www.gtz.de Disaster Reduction: Knowledge, Transfer, Practices (GTZ) http://www.gtz.de/en/publikationen/17173.htm
Integrated Early Warning Systems Report on Regional Unmet Needs and Recommendations: Tsunami Early Warning Systems (TEWS) in the Indian Ocean and Southeast Asia (ESCAP) (August 2007) http://www.ESCAP.org/pmd/documents/TSU-MappingStudy-100807.pdf Evaluation and Strengthening of Early Warning Systems in Countries Affected by the 26 December 2004 Tsunami (UN/ISDR) (June 2007) http://www.unisdr.org/ppew/tsunami/pdf/TEWS_donor_report.pdf Bridging the “Last Mile” Building grassroots capacity for disaster warning and preparedness in Sri Lanka Canada, International Development Research Center (IDRC) http://www.tveap.org/news/HazInfo%20project%20-%20general%20intro%20%20FINAL%2010%20April%202006.pdf Indian Ocean Tsunami Warning System (USAID) http://www.us-iotws.gov/ Global Survey of Early Warning Systems (ISDR) (October 2006) http://www.unisdr.org/eng/about_isdr/basic_docs/SG-report/SG-report-c2-61-CRP1-GSEWS.pdf Usable Science 8: Early Warning Systems: Do’s and Don’ts Report of Workshop, 20-23 October 2003, Shanghai, China (February 2004) http://www.ccb.ucar.edu/warning/report.html
36
Indian Ocean Tsunami Early Warning System Press Conference (USAID) (2006) http://www.usaid.gov/press/speeches/2005/sp050914_1.html National Early Warning System: Sri Lanka A Participatory Concept Paper for the Design of an Effective All-Hazard Public Warning System (LIRNEasia) (March 2005) http://www.lirneasia.net/wp-content/news-sl.pdf Evaluating Last-Mile Hazard Information Dissemination Ongoing project until December 2007 (LIRNEasia) http://www.lirneasia.net/projects/current-projects/evaluating-last-mile-hazard-informationdissemination-hazinfo/ Last Mile Warning Communications Inventory Ongoing project 2006-2007 (USAID) http://www.d-trac.org/en/projects_iotws ISDR – PPEW Platform for the Promotion of Early Warning http://www.unisdr.org/ppew/ppew-index.htm Global Survey of Early Warning Systems An assessment of capacities, gaps and opportunities toward building a comprehensive global early warning system for all natural hazards UN/ISDR (September 2006) http://www.unisdr.org/ppew/info-resources/ewc3/Global-Survey-of-Early-Warning-Systems.pdf Developing Early Warning Systems: A Checklist (UN/ISDR) (March 2006) http://www.ewc3.org/upload/downloads/checklist.final_pdf.pdf Disaster Early Warning Systems: People Politics and Economics Benfield Hazard Research Centre Disaster Studies Working Paper (June 2006) http://www.benfieldhrc.org/disaster_studies/working_papers/pdfs/workingpaper16.pdf Symposium on Multi-Hazard Early Warning Systems for Integrated Disaster Risk Management The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Symposium 2006 http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/dpm/ews_symposium_2006/ Challenges and issues for implementation of multi-hazard Early Warning Systems for integrated risk reduction in developing and least developed countries Filipe Lucio, World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Symposium 2006 at http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/dpm/ews_symposium_2006/index_en.html Community-based preparedness and response to multi-hazard early warning Background documentation for Session 5, Contribution by the Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, by Horst Letz, World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Symposium 2006 at http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/dpm/ews_symposium_2006/index_en.html
37
Livelihood recovery Social Vulnerability, Sustainable Livelihoods and Disasters Cannon, Twigg, Rowell (DFID) (2003) http://www.livelihoods.org/info/docs/vulnerability.doc International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) http://www.ifrc.org Tsunami two-year progress report (IFRC) (2006) http://www.ifrc.org/Docs/pubs/Updates/toprogress-report-1206.pdf Disaster Management – Tsunami Operation (IFRC) http://www.ifrc.org/what/disasters/response/tsunamis/ South/Southeast Asia and East Africa: Earthquake and Tsunamis – Fact Sheet No. 31 “Livelihoods recovery in relation to disasters” (IFRC) (September 2007) http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/KHII-76T9MB?OpenDocument Duryog Nivaran – South Asian Network for Disaster Risk Reduction http://www.duryognivaran.org Livelihood Options for Disaster Risk Reduction in South Asia (Duryog Nivaran) http://www.duryognivaran.org/duryog/pages.php?pid=16 Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets Department for International Development (DFID) (April 1999) http://www.nssd.net/pdf/sectiont.pdf Tools for mainstreaming disaster risk reduction – Sustainable Livelihoods Approaches Provention Consortium (2007) http://www.proventionconsortium.org/themes/default/pdfs/tools_for_mainstreaming_GN10.pdf A Model of Sustainable Livelihoods Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) (January 2003) http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/sei/prp/pdfdocs/3%20livelihoods%20factsheet.pdf The State and Civil Society in Disaster Response An Analysis of the Tamil Nadu Tsunami Experience Tata Institute of Social Sciences (2005) http://www.un.org.in/untrs/reports/care2005rep.pdf Planning for Livelihood recovery ISDR Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction (June 2007) http://www.ilo.org/public/english/employment/crisis/download/isdr-back.pdf Livelihoods and Climate Change Combining disaster risk reduction, natural resources management and climate change adaptation to reduce vulnerability and poverty (IUCN, SEI, IISD, Inter cooperation) (December 2003) http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2003/envsec_livelihoods_1.pdf
38
From Post-Tsunami Emergency Assistance to Livelihood Recovery in South India (International Federation Terre des Hommes) (February 2007) http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWFiles2007.nsf/FilesByRWDocUnidFilename/TKAI-73E396Full_Report.pdf/$File/Full_Report.pdf Livelihoods Connect Guidance Sheets on the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach UK Department for International Development (DFID) http://www.livelihoods.org/info/info_guidancesheets.html Micro-finance, Risk Management, and Poverty (USAID) (March 2000) http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNACJ418.pdf Sustainable livelihoods and vulnerability to disasters John Twigg for Disaster Mitigation Institute (DMI) (March 2001) http://www.benfieldhrc.org/disaster_studies/working_papers/pdfs/workingpaper2.pdf Resources for the South-East Asia Tsunami Crisis (Livelihoods Connect) (January 2005) http://www.livelihoods.org/post/Env9-postit.html Responding to Life’s Changed Shores: The Challenge of Transition and Adaptation Following the Tsunami Marcus Moench (ISET) (January 2005) http://www.disasterdiplomacy.org/MarcusMoenchTransitionAdaptation.rtf Post-Tsunami Sustainable Livelihoods Programme for the Coastal Communities of Tamil Nadu The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) http://www.ifad.org/english/operations/pi/ind/i662in/index.htm Livelihood Centred Approach to Disaster Management – a Policy Framework (April 2005) http://practicalaction.org/?id=disasters_livelihood_approach
Recovery support to orphans, separated children and youth (OSCY) Strategies for Improved Social Protection in Asia: Fiona Howell (ADB), Social Assistance (Theoretical background) http://www.adb.org/Poverty/forum/pdf/Howell2.pdf Save the children http://www.savethechildren.org Protecting Separated Children in Asia Save the children http://www.rb.se/NR/rdonlyres/070823C6-83BE-4490-A9FD-05B8011C0CCB/0/ ProtectingseparatedchildreninAsia.pdf Rebuilding Lives after the Tsunami: Three Years Later Save the children http://www.savethechildren.org/emergencies/asia-tsunami/rebuilding-lives-tsunami.html
39
New Guidelines To Improve Psychological and Social Assistance in Emergencies Newletter, Save the Children, September 2007 http://www.savethechildren.org/newsroom/2007/guidelines-psychosocial.html The IASC Guidelines on mental health and Psychosocial support in emergency setting (WHO) (2007) http://www.who.int/hac/network/interagency/news/mental_health_guidelines/en/index.html Disasters and communities: understanding social resilience The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, May 2007 http://www.ema.gov.au/agd/EMA/rwpattach.nsf/VAP/ (1FEDA2C440E4190E0993A00B7C030CB7)~16-20maguire.pdf/$file/16-20maguire.pdf United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) http://www.unicef.org Building Back Better: A 12-month update on UNICEF’s work to rebuild children’s lives and restore hope since the tsunami (UNICEF, December 2005) http://www.unicef.org/publications/files/TSUNAMI_eBOOK.pdf Much done, more to do: A 24-Month Update on UNICEF’s Work to Rebuild Children’s Lives and Restore Hope Since the Tsunami (UNICEF) (December 2006) http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/files/tsunami_2-year_2006.pdf Policy advocacy and partnerships for children’s rights Conference on Social protection for children (UNICEF) (October 2006) http://www.unicef.org/policyanalysis/index_36230.html
Gender Gender Perspective: Working Together for Disaster Risk Reduction – Good Practices and Lessons Learned (UN/ISDR) (June 2007) http://www.unisdr.org/eng/about_isdr/isdr-publications/09-gender-good-practices/gender-goodpractices.pdf Women build resilience Disaster watch http://www.disasterwatch.net/ Gender and Disaster Network www.gdnonline.org List of recent important publications http://www.gdnonline.org/wot_latest_additions.htm Guidelines for gender sensitive disaster management (2006) http://www.iwda.org.au/wp/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/guidelines_gender_sensitive.pdf Gender Matters: Lessons for disaster risk reduction in South Asia (ICIMOD, ECHO) (April 2007) http://www.gdnonline.org/resources/Gender&disaster-preparednessICIMOD.pdf 40
Women, Disaster Reduction and Sustainable Development (UN/ISDR) (April 2003) http://www.unisdr.org/eng/risk-reduction/gender/Women_disaster_reduction_and_SD.pdf Gender Mainstreaming in Disaster Reduction Sálvano Briceño, Director UN/ISDR.Commission (March 2002) http://www.unisdr.org/eng/risk-reduction/gender/Gender_ISDR_CSW_6_March_02.doc
41
Appendix 2 Meetings of the Capacity-Building Process in Pilot Project C Workshop on Strengthening Community Support for Orphans, Separated Children and Youth, 14-16 November 2006, Banda, Aceh, Indonesia Sessions on child protection issues were undertaken with visits to child centres by workshop participants for better grasp of the main issues affecting the OSCY in Aceh. Participants represented Cut Lamkuweuh Village and Pulo, two Aceh communities worst hit by the tsunami. The aim was to provide these participants with the proper knowledge on child protection policy through materials prepared by the Ministry of Social Affairs, DINSOS and UNICEF, and, secondly, to gain an understanding of the perceived needs of the participants so that future policy-making could be formulated according to these needs. Cut Lamkuweuh Villagers, previously well-off, were employed in government, private companies, owned shops, or worked as craftsmen, house builders and furniture makers, skills in demand during the reconstruction phase. Participants from Pulo, Aceh, mostly fishermen and farmers, were too traumatized to resurrect what was left of their livelihood. The majority of these IDP’s were impoverished, struggling to meet their basic needs, and living in temporary shelters isolated from centres of economic activity. They had become part of a growing class of permanent Achenese IDPs seeking constant humanitarian support. The participants felt that they gained important knowledge about child protection and child rearing. For example, the training made them more aware of the many unfortunate events that may occur to OSCY, such as child trafficking and exploitation. The participants saw the training workshop as an opportunity to increase their chances of getting financial assistance to run livelihood activities, such as small shops and businesses, farming, handicrafts and home economics. They were hopeful of obtaining educational scholarships for OSCYs (elementary up to tertiary education) and to finance the cost of running youth centres and boarding houses for OSCYs.
National Meeting on Policy Advocacy for Enhancing Community Resilience to Natural Disasters Focusing on Children and Youth, 20-22 March 2007, Jakarta, Indonesia Focusing particular attention on the needs and concerns of OSCY and community resilience to natural disasters, the first meeting on policy advocacy aimed at enhancing community resilience to natural disasters specifically regarding children and youth. The initiative was part of an effort by ESCAP and the Ministry of Social Affairs (MOSA) to develop policies to address OSCY problems in Aceh. Inputs were obtained from participants to develop policies related to child protection in the aftermath of the tsunami in Aceh and other natural disasters elsewhere in Indonesia. The meeting functioned as a forum to gain information in preparation for succeeding ESCAP training workshops with MOSA and DINSOS in Banda Aceh. It emphasized policy advocacy as an effective means to overcome the expected problems of OSCY while international technical and financial assistance was gradually being reduced. Discussion keyed in on community empowerment through training and managing children and youth centres as well as the development of small and medium-sized enterprises or micro-financing to enhance the resilience of communities with OSCY.
42
Training Workshop on Youth Participation and Support Systems in the Aftermath of Disasters, 22 to 24 May 2007, Banda, Aceh, Indonesia The workshop, jointly conducted by ESCAP and its international and local partners in Banda Aceh, explored applicable strategies on psychosocial care, livelihoods and community participation and strengthening support for OSCY. Discussions provided youth, mostly member affiliates of NGOs like Child Fund Indonesia and UNICEF, a venue to voice their issues and concerns in the presence of community leaders, local organizations, international organizations and members of government. Discussions centred on underlying youth-related issues (education, youth vulnerability, employment and health). These topics were examined in terms of positive and negative attributes in order to formulate future recommendations identifying other problems (e.g. street youth, proliferation of drugs, psychosocial trauma from the tsunami disaster, child abuse, child soldiers, physical and mental disabilities, human trafficking, reproductive health, teenage pregnancy, education, child labour and poverty) and provide possible solutions reinforcing the existing systems on education, employment and health. Discussions suggested ways to rectify or strengthen referral systems responding to the needs of youth, victims of conflict and the tsunami in Aceh Besar and Banda Aceh in cooperation with stakeholders and government agencies. Action plans laid stress on gathering valid data, from government and non-government sources, and using that information to improve every aspect of their society, from shelters to trainings, so that they could work together towards creating a better future. The workshop concluded with the message that, although the youth were enthusiastic and eager to implement their action plans, they would need to advocate for the financial resources that they required from government agencies and other financial aid institutions. In other words, synergistic partnerships and concerted efforts among all concerned stakeholders were absolutely necessary to make these plans a reality.
Follow Up Meeting on Policy Advocacy for Enhancing Community Resilience to Natural Disasters Focusing on Children and Youth, 24-26 July 2007, Jakarta, Indonesia This three-day meeting was the last in the series of four events held jointly by ESCAP and MOSA. It was convened to summarize the ideas collated from previous workshops and the previous meeting and to refine the recommendations that were put forward by participants regarding ways in which community resilience to natural hazards could be enhanced at the community level and how advocacy for child protection policies would be in the best interest of the OSCY of Aceh. Participants who attended the previous meeting from MOSA, government and NGOs worked on ways to solve the enormous problems continually facing disaster victims in Aceh, when the technical and financial assistance from international aid agencies and NGOs was no longer available. Strategies derived concentrated on survival in order to enhance community resilience in anticipating future natural hazards and other catastrophes, improvement in coordination between government agencies and civil society groups, while NGOs were considered a prerequisite in ensuring the effectiveness of policies which enhance community preparedness and mitigate the impact of natural hazards. Issues pertaining to community preparedness also drew much attention, where local wisdom and customs contributing to a traditional early warning system were considered very useful for predicting the occurrence of natural hazards, such as a tsunami. These natural early warning signs could take the form of receding shorelines, dark clouds and fleeing birds. The residents of Simeulue Island heeded such natural early warning signs because of traditional knowledge passed down through the generations and most of them were able to get to higher ground just before the 2004 tsunami hit their island.
43
Problems in regulations, policies and coordination, mostly between people working in the field and local community representatives, raised issues derivative of day-to-day problems caused by the armed conflict and the tsunami that needed immediate attention and solutions. Among other things, it was concluded at the meeting that better understanding and cooperation were needed to reduce the potential for mutual distrust, occurring between working groups, to efficiently address post-disaster problems.
44
Printed in Bangkok August 2008 – 635
United Nations publication Sales No. E.08.II.F.20 Copyright © United Nations 2008 ISBN: 978-92-1-120553-4 ST/ESCAP/2508
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific Environment and Sustainable Development Division United Nations Building, Rajadamnern Nok Avenue Bangkok 10200, Thailand Tel.: +66 2 2881450 Fax: +66 2 2881059; 1048 E-mail:
[email protected] [email protected] Web site: http://www.unescap.org/
